Guidelines on co-processing Waste Materials in Cement Production

Transcription

Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Technische Zusammenarbeit
GmbH (GTZ)
D. Ziegler, W. Schimpf
P.O. Box 5180
65726 Eschborn
Germany
Tel. ++49 6196 79 0
Fax ++49 6196 79 11 15
[email protected]
www.gtz.de
The public part is being financed by:
Holcim Group Support Ltd
B. Dubach, J-P. Degré
Hagenholzstr. 85
8050 Zürich
Switzerland
Tel. ++41 58 858 82 30
Fax ++41 58 858 82 34
[email protected]
www.holcim.com
Fachhochschule
Nordwestschweiz FHNW
D. Mutz
Gründenstrasse 40
4132 Muttenz
Switzerland
Tel. ++41 61 467 42 42
Fax ++41 467 44 60
[email protected]
www.fhnw.ch
Guidelines on co-processing Waste Materials in Cement Production | The GTZ-Holcim Public Private Partnership
For further information contact: www.coprocem.com
Guidelines on co-processing
Waste Materials in Cement Production
The GTZ-Holcim Public Private Partnership
Guidelines on Co-processing
95070_Guidelines.indd A
27.06.2006 10:18:01 Uhr
Important Notice
These Guidelines are addressed to stakeholders and decision makers from the private and public sectors
engaged in waste management and cement production. The document offers guiding principles and gives a
general orientation concerning the conditions in which co-processing can be applied. They make certain recommendations and provide certain country-specific experiences, but cannot and should not be used as a
template. Each person, legal entity or country, in engaging in waste co-processing, must develop its own
standards based on international conventions and national and local conditions and must harmonize them
with its legal framework. These Guidelines shall not be legally binding nor shall they be construed as constituting any obligation, representation or warranty on the part of the authors or the sender or any technical,
commercial, legal or any other advice.
While all reasonable care has been taken to ensure accuracy of the information contained in these
Guidelines, none of Holcim Group Support Ltd and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
GmbH (GTZ) and/or any of its respective affiliates, directors, officers, employees, consultants, advisers and/or
contractors accepts any responsibility or liability for any errors, or omissions in or otherwise in relation to
these Guidelines. Nor does the information imply an opinion on the part of or any endorsement by such
entities or persons.
For all purposes, the legal relationship of the legal entities, individuals or any other persons mentioned
in these Guidelines (each a Person) to each other shall be that of independent Persons and nothing in these
Guidelines shall be deemed in any way or for any purpose to constitute either Person or any affiliate of a
Person or a member of either Person’s group an agent of any of the other Persons or any affiliate of any of
the other Persons or any member of either Person’s group in the conduct of such Person's business or to create a partnership, an agency or joint venture between such Persons.
Copyright © 2006 Holcim Group Support Ltd and
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
All rights reserved.
B
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:B
27.06.2006 10:18:07 Uhr
About these Guidelines
One of the major objectives of these Guidelines is to help make waste management more efficient by offering objective information about co-processing of waste in the cement industry. This ambitious report is based on intensive
dialogues and working sessions.
These Guidelines have been prepared by experts from Holcim and GTZ. Support and advice were given by a
variety of external experts from public and private sector as well as from the cement industry and from organizations
working in international development cooperation. The elaboration of the document was coordinated by the
Institute for Ecopreneurship (IEC) of the University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland (FHNW).
The Management Team of this initiative wishes to express sincere thanks to the collaborating experts from
Holcim and GTZ and all who participated by sharing their time, information and insights.
Participants of the start-up event in September 2003 in Bonn, Germany
GmbH (GTZ)
P.O. Box 5180
65726 Eschborn
Germany
Tel. ++49 6196 79 0
Fax ++49 6196 79 11 15
[email protected]
www.gtz.de
Hagenholzstr. 85
8050 Zürich
Switzerland
Tel. ++41 58 858 82 30
Fax ++41 58 858 82 34
[email protected]
www.holcim.com
Fachhochschule
D. Mutz
Gründenstrasse 40
4132 Muttenz
Switzerland
Tel. ++41 61 467 42 42
Fax ++41 467 44 60
[email protected]
www.fhnw.ch
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:C
C
27.06.2006 10:18:08 Uhr
Foreword
These Guidelines result from a joint initiative by the
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
GmbH (GTZ) and Holcim Group Support Ltd (Holcim), to
promote the co-processing of waste in cement kilns –
that is, the use of wastes along with other materials in
kilns to produce cement. Holcim (Y www.holcim.com) is a
worldwide leading supplier of cement and aggregates as
well as value-adding activities such as ready-mix concrete and asphalt, including services. GTZ (Y www.gtz.de)
is a government owned corporation for international cooperation for sustainable development with worldwide
operations. The findings and recommendations are based
on experiences from industrialized and developing countries, as well as from the public and private sectors.
These Guidelines are based on an approach that
aims to reduce existing waste problems in developing
countries and at the same time to encourage the use of
waste as an alternative source for primary energy and
virgin raw materials in cement kilns.
The Guidelines are also based on initiatives of
bilateral or multilateral organizations to improve waste
management at national and local levels, as well as
attempts by the cement industry to reduce the negative environmental impacts of cement production.
There is general agreement that co-processing of
waste in cement kilns requires:
We have paid special attention to the work of the
Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD),
which looks at options for improving environmental performance and increasing corporate social responsibility.
Using waste co-processing in cement production
will help in achieving the targets set in Agenda 21 of the
“Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro (1992), the
Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (2002) and the Millennium Development Goals.
We prepared the Guidelines taking into consideration all related international conventions such as the
Basel and the Stockholm Conventions and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto Protocol).
Avoiding the creation of wastes and reducing
their quantities are the best ways of dealing with
current waste problems all over the world. Wherever
possible, the concepts of resource efficiency, cleaner
production (CP), recycling and reuse must be given first
priority. Co-processing of wastes does not conflict with
the waste hierarchy, as it can be classified as a technology for energy and material recovery.
D
Close collaboration and co-operation between the
public and the private sectors are the key to achieving
the maximum benefit from co-processing of waste in
cement kilns. Innovative techniques and technical knowhow are available and will be further developed by the
private sector, whereas the public sector should ensure
that environmental standards are maintained and
health and safety regulations are applied and enforced.
the observation of and compliance with all applicable
laws and regulations (in some jurisdictions the legislation in relation to waste processing has yet to be
put in place or is in the process of being amended in
line with regulatory or technical developments)
Y facility personnel and government regulators/inspectors knowledgeable and experienced in waste
combustion, including toxic/hazardous waste
Y a proper enforcement of the legal framework for all
waste management activities, combined with monitoring by the authorities and the strict enforcement
of regulations
Y the establishment of local emergency preparedness
and response programs, in addition to any national
programs
Y health and safety programs for personnel who may
come into contact with toxic or hazardous waste
Y a “corporate responsibility” approach on the parts of
the private and public sectors alike
Y transparency in terms of information and communications.
Y
Thus ethical conduct, good governance and social
responsibility are prerequisites for successfully implementing the Guidelines.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:D
27.06.2006 10:18:08 Uhr
Contents
1.0
Executive summary ....................................................................................................................................1
2.0
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 3
3.0
Purpose, target groups, and boundaries of the Guidelines .................................................................... 5
4.0
General definition and principles of co-processing ................................................................................ 7
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.3.4
Main characteristics of co-processing in the cement industry .............................................................. 11
Cement manufacturing ....................................................................................................................................11
Co-processing in the cement industry .......................................................................................................... 13
The process and its application ......................................................................................................................................... 13
Co-processing and waste management ........................................................................................................................14
Pre-processing: From waste to AFR ................................................................................................................................. 16
Financing of waste services and the polluter-pays principle ............................................................................... 16
Requirements for the implementation of co-processing ........................................................................... 17
Institutional challenges for co-processing .................................................................................................................... 17
Areas for capacity building .................................................................................................................................................. 17
Implementation of capacity development ...................................................................................................................18
Implementation of the Guidelines .................................................................................................................................. 19
6.0
6.1
6.1.1
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.1.4
6.1.5
6.1.6
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.5
6.2.6
6.2.7
6.2.8
6.3
6.3.1
6.3.2
6.3.3
6.3.4
6.3.5
6.3.6
Requirements for co-processing in cement kilns ...................................................................................21
Legal aspects ..................................................................................................................................................... 21
Principles .....................................................................................................................................................................................21
The legal framework .............................................................................................................................................................. 21
The institutional framework.............................................................................................................................................. 22
Emission control and selection of waste: Enforceable standards are needed ............................................. 22
Permitting process for co-processing ............................................................................................................................. 24
Baseline testing – trial burn testing ...............................................................................................................................26
Environmental aspects of cement production and AFR pre-processing ................................................. 27
Principles .................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
Significant emissions ............................................................................................................................................................ 27
Generation of emissions and reduction techniques................................................................................................29
Monitoring and reporting of emissions ........................................................................................................................30
Environmental impact of pollutants in products ....................................................................................................... 31
Leaching of incorporated pollutants from concrete ................................................................................................. 31
Special comments regarding Dioxins and Furans..................................................................................................... 32
Management of kiln and bypass dust ........................................................................................................................... 33
Operational issues ........................................................................................................................................... 34
Principles .................................................................................................................................................................................... 34
Waste and AFR sourcing ...................................................................................................................................................... 35
Materials transport, handling and storage .................................................................................................................. 35
Operational aspects...............................................................................................................................................................36
Quality control system ......................................................................................................................................................... 37
Monitoring and auditing..................................................................................................................................................... 38
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:E
E
27.06.2006 10:18:09 Uhr
Contents
6.4
6.4.1
6.4.2
6.4.3
6.4.4
6.4.5
6.5
6.5.1
6.5.2
6.5.3
F
Occupational health and safety (OH&S) ...................................................................................................... 39
Principles ....................................................................................................................................................................................39
The cornerstones of an occupational health & safety (OH&S) system .......................................................... 40
Organization for safety and security .............................................................................................................................. 42
Spill response plan ................................................................................................................................................................. 43
Emergency response plans ................................................................................................................................................. 43
Communication issues and social responsibility ........................................................................................ 43
Principles and requirements .............................................................................................................................................. 43
The importance of communication ................................................................................................................................44
A systemic approach to communications ....................................................................................................................44
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:F
27.06.2006 10:18:09 Uhr
Index of Case Studies ................................................................................................................................................... i-ixx
Case 1
Selection of adequate feed points - The example of Lägerdorf, Holcim Germany ..........................................i
Case 2
An integrated waste management concept – The example from Cartago, Costa Rica .............................. iii
Case 3
Pre-processing of waste material - The example of Energis, Holcim Group, in Albox, Spain .....................v
Case 4
Aspects of permitting – The example from North Rhine Westfalia, Germany.............................................. vii
Case 5
Emissions Monitoring and Reporting (EMR) - The experiences at Holcim ...................................................... ix
Case 6
Pre-processing of waste material – The example of Ecoltec, Mexico ................................................................. xi
Case 7
Test burns with PCDDs/PCDFs monitoring - The Philippines examples.........................................................xiii
Case 8
AFR quality control laboratory - The example of Resotec, Brasil ......................................................................... xv
Case 9
Erika waste recovery – The example of Holcim support for oil tanker spill clean-up, France ...............xvii
Case 10
Community advisory panel: The example of Energis in Albox, Spain ..............................................................xix
Index of Annexes....................................................................................................................................................... A1-A53
Annex 1
Bibliography, Literature and Internet links ...................................................................................................................A2
Annex 2
Waste used for AFR in Europe and Japan .....................................................................................................................A5
Annex 3
Development of the utilization of alternative fuels in the German cement industry ..............................A7
Annex 4
Source for contacts and information ............................................................................................................................ A8
Annex 5
List of waste material suited for co-processing ...................................................................................................... A10
Annex 6
Example of an Accept-Refuse Chart .............................................................................................................................A18
Annex 7
Limit values for waste and AFR .......................................................................................................................................A19
Annex 8
Justification for the exclusion of certain waste material from co-processing ........................................... A22
Annex 9
Permit model ......................................................................................................................................................................... A25
Annex 10
Application form ..................................................................................................................................................................A30
Annex 11
Permitting process .............................................................................................................................................................. A34
Annex 12
Information on test burn ..................................................................................................................................................A35
Annex 13
EPER – The European Polluting Emissions Register for the cement industry ..............................................A37
Annex 14
Ranges of emissions and reduction techniques ..................................................................................................... A38
Annex 15
Total emission limit values for cement kilns co-processing waste ..................................................................A41
Annex 16
Summary of the WBCSD/UNEP report on POPs ..................................................................................................... A42
Annex 17
Template for master data file for commonly used waste ................................................................................... A45
Annex 18
AFR quality control scheme .............................................................................................................................................A49
Annex 19
Situation analysis – how to do it ..................................................................................................................................A50
General and chemical abbreviations & Glossar ........................................................................................................... A51
Glossary……………… .......................................................................................................................................................... A53
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:G
G
27.06.2006 10:18:10 Uhr
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs1:H
27.06.2006 10:18:10 Uhr
1.0 Executive Summary
Different types of wastes have been successfully coprocessed as alternative fuels and raw materials (AFR)
in cement kilns in Europe, Japan, USA, Canada and Australia since the beginning of the 1970s.
These Guidelines are meant to gather the lessons
of that experience and offer it particularly to developing
countries that need to improve approaches to waste
management. Some developing countries will need capacity building help before launching AFR programs.
define the requirements and standards for co-processing. Regulators and operators should conduct baseline
tests with conventional fuels and materials so they can
compare AFR results to these. Some wastes should
never be co-processed; these range from unsorted municipal garbage and certain hospital wastes to explosives and radioactive waste. Other wastes will need
pre-processing before they can be used, and approaches to AFR use should take account of the need to effectively regulate and manage these pre-processing
plants.
The Guidelines, meant for all of the cement industry and all of its stakeholders, result from a public-private
partnership between Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GTZ) (Y www.gtz.de) and
Holcim Group Support Ltd. (Y www.holcim.com). These
findings and recommendations are based on experiences from industrialized and developing countries, as well
as from the public and private sectors. They are also
based on initiatives of bilateral and multilateral organizations to improve waste management at national and
local levels, as well as attempts by the cement industry
to reduce environmental degradation resulting from cement production. They reflect international laws and
conventions.
Following certain basic rules assures that the use
of AFR does not change the emissions of a cement kiln
stack. These include feeding alternative fuels into the
most suitable zones of the kiln, feeding materials that
contain a lot of volatile matter into the high temperature zone only, and avoiding materials that contain pollutants kilns cannot retain, such as mercury. Emissions
must be monitored, some only once a year and others
continuously. Environmental impact assessments (EIA)
should be done to confirm compliance with environmental standards; risk assessments can identify any
weaknesses in the system, and material flux and energy
flow analyses help to optimize the use of resources.
The use of AFR can decrease the environmental
impacts of wastes, safely dispose of hazardous wastes,
decrease greenhouse gas emissions, decrease waste
handling costs and save money in the cement industry.
It will help in achieving the targets set in Agenda 21 of
the “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro (1992), the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development
(2002) and the Millennium Development Goals. However, there are some basic rules and principles that
should be observed.
Cement plant operators using AFR shall ensure
their traceability from reception up to final treatment.
Transport of wastes and AFR must comply with regulations. Plants must have developed, implemented and
communicated to employees adequate spill response
and emergency plans. For start-up, shut-down and conditions in between, strategies for dealing with AFR must
be documented and available to plant operators. Plants
need well-planned and functioning quality control systems, as well as monitoring and auditing protocols.
AFR use should respect the waste hierarchy, be integrated into waste management programs, support strategies for resource efficiency and not hamper waste reduction efforts. Following certain basic rules assures that
the use of AFR does not have negative impacts on cement
kiln emissions. Co-processing should not harm the quality of the cement produced. Countries considering coprocessing need appropriate legislative and regulatory
frameworks. National laws should define the basic
principles under which co-processing takes place and
Risks can be minimized by properly locating plants
in terms of environmental setting, proximity to populations and settlements, and the impact of logistics and
transport. Plants will require good infrastructure in
terms of technical solutions for vapors, odors, dust, infiltration into ground or surface waters, and fire protection. All aspects of using AFR must be well documented,
as documentation and information are the basis for
openness and transparency about health and safety
measures, inside and outside the plant.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs2:1
1
27.06.2006 10:18:10 Uhr
1.0 Executive Summary
Management and employees must be trained in
handling and processing of AFR. Hazardous operations
training for new workers and subcontractors should be
completed before starting with co-processing. Periodic
re-certification should be done for employees and subcontractors. Induction training should be included for
all visitors and third parties. Understanding risks and
how to mitigate them are keys to training. Training authorities is the basis for building credibility.
(e.g. the Millennium Development Goals). However, one
cannot expect that the public sector in any country or
each and every cement plant operator or waste handling company anywhere in the world can implement
all the proposed standards straight away. To achieve the
proposed standards, a stepwise and country specific
(phasing) program or action plan is required, which ideally represents a consensus (reflecting the enhanced
cooperation) between the public and private sector.
Introducing AFR requires open communications
with all stakeholders. Provide all the information stakeholders need to allow them to understand the purposes
of co-processing, the context, the functions of parties
involved, and decision-making procedures. Open discussions about good and bad experiences are part of
transparency, leading to corrective actions. Be credible
and consistent, cultivating a spirit of open dialogue and
respect for differing cultures.
As populations increase in the developing world,
so do waste management problems, and so does the
need for more cement and concrete for housing and
the infrastructure of development. The properly managed use of wastes as fuels and raw materials in cement kilns can help manage wastes while contributing
to the sustainable development of our world.
In these Guidelines the bar has been kept high in
terms of environmental, social and health and safety
standards, but they are realistic and achievable. Ambitious targets are needed in order to achieve goals
2
27.06.2006 10:18:11 Uhr
2.0 Introduction
Greenhouse gases and global warming, the efficient
use of non-renewable fossil fuels, toxic residues, and
the contamination of water and soil resources are in
the forefront of ecological concerns and public discussions. Cost competitiveness, global competition and
profitability are the concerns of business. The challenge
facing today’s society is to balance environmental protection and economic interest.
The cement industry consumes a significant
amount of natural resources and energy. It also contributes worldwide to the development and modernization
of cities and infrastructure. The cement industry and its
associations continuously try to improve environmental performance by optimizing the use of natural resources and reducing its overall energy consumption.
Cement consumption is increasing, especially in
developing countries and countries in transition. Worldwide cement production in 2003 was 1.94 billion tons
(metric tons), increasing from 1.69 billion tons in 2001
with a steady increase of an estimated 3.6% yearly due
to the strong demand in developing countries and
countries in transition. Europe’s share of consumption
is 14.4%; USA, 4.7%; the rest of the Americas, 6.6%;
Asia, 67.5% (China, 41.9%); Africa, 4.1%, and the rest of
the world 2.7%. Estimated cement consumption in
2004 was 260 kg per capita (Source: Cembureau1).
Whenever possible, best available technology
(BAT) should be used2 and can usually achieve significant reductions in energy consumption. Over the past
20 years, the European cement industry has reduced its
energy consumption by about 30%, equivalent to saving approximately 11 million tons of coal per year.
Substituting fossil fuel and virgin raw material by
waste (Alternative Fuels and Raw materials – AFR) will
further reduce overall CO2 emissions if the waste material being used would instead have been burned or
disposed without energy recovery.
The cement industry presents a mixed picture. International companies, whose market share is increasing, usually adopt their own internal standards throughout the world, using best available technologies when
building new facilities. From a technical point of view,
all kiln types are suited for co-processing. However,
older, polluting, and less integrated technologies are
gradually being phased out due to stricter standards
and/or voluntary best practices. Older cement plants
may fall short of both best available technology standards and standards related to business ethics, labor
rights, health, safety and environment. The situation
varies in different countries due to the cement market
structure and the state of regulations.
Poor waste management is a challenge in developing countries and in countries in transition. In most of
those countries, waste is discharged to sewers, buried or
burned on company premises, illegally dumped at unsuitable locations, or taken to landfills that fail to meet
requirements for the environmentally sound final disposal of waste. This can cause contamination of soil,
water resources, and the atmosphere, leading to the
sustained deterioration of the living conditions and
health of the adjacent populations. Toxic substances and
persistent compounds escape into the environment, are
spread through the air over large areas, and can enter
the food chain, affecting human and animal health.
Several factors can cause these problems:
Not all developing countries have an integrated
waste management strategy and only a few can offer an appropriate technical infrastructure for disposing of waste in a controlled and environmentally
sound manner
Y Although in many cases laws concerning the controlled handling of waste exist, they are often not properly enforced
Y Uncontrolled disposal is usually the cheapest way to
get rid of the waste, and the waste generators tend
to be unwilling to pay much for adequate disposal
Y
1 Cembureau, based in Brussels, is the representative organization of the cement industry in Europe and includes 25 members
2 Useful information on BAT can be found in the following two documents:
- Cembureau, 1999. Best Available Technology for the cement industry
- Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) 2001. Reference document on Best Available Technology in the Cement
and Lime manufacturing industries
3
27.06.2006 10:18:11 Uhr
2.0 Introduction
Y
Policy makers rarely pay enough attention to the subject of waste management, and may know little
about the consequences for human health or the
high cost of the remediation of the damage caused
by uncontrolled waste disposal.
Y Table
1 gives an overview of energy substitution
through AFR in the cement industry in selected
countries.
There is general agreement that there is an urgent
need to improve waste management, and different solutions are being discussed. Waste avoidance, cleaner
production, producer responsibility, supply chain management or sustainable use of natural resources are
only a few of the strategies being promoted. In spite of
technological progress and an increasing social and
political awareness, the problem of growing waste
streams persists. The “zero waste society” is a worthy
vision, but we are far from realizing it.
Industrialized countries have had more than 20
years of positive experiences with AFR [ Y see Annex 3:
AFR development in Germany ]. Why then are wastes
not being used routinely as AFR in the cement plants of
developing countries, and why has co-processing not
been better promoted as an ecologically beneficial form
of energy and material recovery? The main reasons are
limited knowledge of the potential of AFR and of legislative and institutional requirements related to coprocessing, political reservations, legal uncertainties
and concerns of the public and NGOs over environmental and health damage.
Modern incineration plants and secure landfills
are common disposal options in OECD countries but
have high investment and operating costs and need
qualified personnel. An efficient cement kiln can provide an environmentally sound, and cost-effective treatment/recovery option for a number of wastes.
Co-processing of hazardous waste in cement production has been recognized as an environmentally
sound disposal method in the context of the Basel Convention3. This addresses the suitability of co-processing
of hazardous waste in cement production and the conditions to which it should be subject.
Different types of wastes have been successfully
used as AFR in cement kilns or similar plants in Europe,
Japan, USA, Canada and Australia since the beginning
of the 1980s [ Y see Annex 2: Utilization of alternative
fuels in the European and Japanese cement industry ].
These Guidelines are intended to make decision
makers from public authorities, the cement industry and
the interested public aware of co-processing as a tool in
waste management and to increase the quality of discussion and decision making in waste management.
Location
Percentage of thermal
energy substituted by AFR
Year
France
32%
2003
Germany
42%
2004
Norway
45%
2003
Switzerland
47%
2002
USA
25%
2003
Table 1: Share of AFR in the total fuel demand in the cement industry in selected countries (Source: CEMBUREAU, SINTEF)
3 The ’Basel Convention Technical Guidelines on Incineration on Land‘, SBC, 1995 (paragraphs 26-27)
– The ‘General technical Guidelines for the environmentally sound management of wastes consisting of, containing or contaminated with
persistent organic pollutants’, SBC, 2004 (section G.2.c) –
4
27.06.2006 10:18:12 Uhr
3.0 Purpose, Target Groups
and Boundaries of the Guidelines
We have tried to make these Guidelines valid for all
countries, independent of location or level of industrialization. However they focus mainly on the use of waste
material as AFR in cement production in developing
countries and countries in transition, thereby offering
an environmentally sound and financially feasible alternative use for some waste material. One of our major
objectives is to help reduce the deficiencies in waste
management. We aim to offer objective information
about co-processing of waste in the cement industry.
Beside these core objectives the Guidelines are
also meant to help:
Y to promote dialogue among public authorities, private enterprises, and civil society, leading to a betterinformed discussion among the various groups
Y to raise awareness and build technical know-how,
which can have positive effects across the entire
waste management sector
Y to show that waste can be an alternative resource for
energy and material recovery.
[ A comprehensive list of literature and Internet links is
attached as Annex 1 ]
The topics of the Guidelines include the preparation of AFR before feeding them into the kiln (preprocessing) and their use as an energy source and raw
material in the kiln itself (co-processing). They also consider topics such as storage, transport, and environmental awareness. The Guidelines do not cover quarry
issues and the re-use of concrete.
The Guidelines are meant to provide various target
groups with relevant information on (i) technical and
legal conditions, (ii) environmental, safety and health
standards, and (iii) professional requirements needed to
ensure that co-processing of waste does not have negative environmental or human health impacts.
The Guidelines offer an overview of strategies for
communication and stakeholder engagement and recommendations for the legal framework needed to
guide the permitting process and the control and enforcement procedures.
The Guidelines offer links to organizations, institutions, and companies active in the field of co-processing
and propose ways and means for capacity building at
all levels to ensure sound application of the technology.
They give references to relevant international environmental agreements.
The Guidelines are aimed at the following target
groups:
Y government organizations and public institutions
Y local communities
Y non-governmental organizations
Y the cement industry, their associations and federations as well as the concrete industry
Y operators of waste handling facilities
Y laboratories involved in waste quality control
Y waste generators.
5
27.06.2006 10:18:12 Uhr
27.06.2006 10:18:13 Uhr
4.0 General Definitions
and Principles of Co-processing
large combustion plants. Even though the EU calls
this process co-incineration, for the purpose of these
Guidelines, co-processing means the substitution of
primary fuel and raw material by waste. It is a recovery of energy and material from waste. Co-processing
is further explained in Y see chapter 5.
These Guidelines use the following definitions:
Y Waste: The EC Framework Waste Directive 75/442/EEC,
Article 1 defines waste as “any substance or object,
which (a) the holder discards or intends or is required
to discard or (b) has to be treated in order to protect
the public health or the environment.” Waste material can be solid, liquid, or pasty. Any waste material can
be defined by its origin (industry, agriculture, mining
etc), hence a proper list should always be established
at national level to help create a common understanding and define a legal framework. Where no
specific list has been defined, the EC Waste Catalogue
might serve as a reference.
Y AFR
(Alternative Fuel and Raw Materials): This refers
to waste materials used for co-processing. Such
wastes typically include plastics and paper/card from
commercial and industrial activities (e.g. packaging
waste or rejects from manufacturing), waste tires,
waste oils, biomass waste (e.g. straw, untreated waste
wood, dried sewage sludge), waste textiles, residues
from car dismantling operations (automative shredder residues - ASR), hazardous industrial waste (e.g.
certain industrial sludges, impregnated sawdust,
spent solvents) as well as obsolete pesticides, outdated drugs, chemicals and pharmaceuticals.
Y Hazardous and non-hazardous waste: The EC Directive
91/689/EC on Hazardous Waste defines hazardous
waste by reference to two Annexes that evaluate the
level of danger of a material (harmful, irritating, combustible…). However, legislation can vary greatly between countries (except within the EU), leading to
differences in determining whether a waste is hazardous or not. For countries where no classification of
waste exists, either the Waste List of the Basel Convention4 or the EC Waste Catalogue5 is recommended.
Y Pre-processing:
Transforming waste to AFR requires
certain standards. AFR does not always consist of a
specific waste stream (such as tires or solvents) but
must be prepared from different waste sources before
being used as fuel or raw material in the cement plant.
The preparation process is needed to produce an AFR
stream that complies with the technical and administrative specifications of cement production and to
guarantee that environmental standards are met.
Y Co-processing: This
refers to the use of waste materials in industrial processes, such as cement, lime, or
steel production and power stations or any other
4 http://www.basel.int/text/con-e-rev.pdf
5 http://www.vrom.nl/get.asp?file=/docs/milieu/eural_engelse_versie.pdf
7
27.06.2006 10:18:13 Uhr
4.0 General Definitions
and Principles of Co-processing
The following general principles should be followed:
8
Principle I
Co-processing respects the waste hierarchy:
Y Co-processing does not hamper waste reduction efforts, and waste shall not be used in
cement kilns if ecologically and economically better ways of recovery are available.
Y Co-processing shall be regarded as an integrated part of modern waste management, as it
provides an environmentally sound resource recovery option for the management of wastes.
Y Co-processing is in line with relevant international environmental agreements, namely the
Basel and Stockholm Conventions.
Principle II
Additional emissions and negative impacts on human health must be avoided:
Y To prevent or keep to an absolute minimum the negative effects of pollution on the
environment as well as risks to human health.
Y On a statistical basis, emissions into the air shall not be higher than those from cement
production with traditional fuel.
Principle III
The quality of the cement product remains unchanged:
Y The product (clinker, cement, concrete) shall not be abused as a sink for heavy metals.
Y The product should not have any negative impact on the environment as e.g. demonstrated
with leaching tests.
Y The quality of cement shall allow end-of-life recovery.
Principle IV
Companies engaged in co-processing must be qualified:
Y Have good environmental and safety compliance track records and to provide relevant information to the public and the appropriate authorities.
Y Have in place personnel, processes, and systems demonstrating commitment to the
protection of the environment, health, and safety.
Y Assure that all requirements comply with applicable laws, rules and regulations.
Y Be capable of controlling inputs and process parameters required for the effective
co-processing of waste materials.
Y Ensure good relations with the public and other actors in local, national and international
waste management schemes.
Principle V
Implementation of co-processing has to consider national circumstances:
Y Country specific requirements and needs must be reflected in regulations and procedures.
Y A stepwise implementation allows for the build-up of required capacity and the set-up
of institutional arrangements.
Y Introduction of co-processing goes along with other change processes in the waste management sector of a country.
27.06.2006 10:18:14 Uhr
Recovery of Materials
erg
us etic &
eo
f w ma
ast teri
e al
(Recycle & Reuse)
Co-Processing
Incineration
y
Landfilling
Uncontrollled
burning or
dumping
En
Chem-Physical
Pre-Treatment
Eli
m
of ina
wa tio
ste n
ilit
Eco-balance or Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is a tool
which can be used to judge the advantages of different
waste management solutions. It provides information
Avoidance
Minimization
ab
sir
The waste hierarchy has to be respected for any
waste disposal option, including co-processing. Coprocessing should be considered as a treatment alternative within an integrated waste management concept. Whenever possible, waste should be avoided or
used for energy and material recovery, as from the ecological and economical point of view this is the most
appropriate solution for any country. However, it may
take time to fully implement this approach in developing countries.
Waste Volume
De
Waste shall be co-processed only if there is no financially and ecologically better way of waste avoidance and recycling. The integration of co-processing into
the waste hierarchy is shown in Y Figure 1 on the right.
The waste management hierarchy is defined as follows:
Y Avoidance or prevention of waste is the ideal solution. This can be achieved only through a strict product policy that ensures that certain materials do not
appear as residues at all.
Y Minimization or reduction of waste, in particular by
the application of the cleaner production concept or
changes in consumer habits related to packaging.
Y Recovery of waste material by means of direct recycling and reuse of primary materials (e.g. metal to
metal or paper to paper). It also includes other technologies like composting or anaerobic digestion.
Y Co-processing – recovery of energy and materials
from waste as a substitute for fossil energy and virgin raw materials.
Y Incineration is primarily a disposal technology to reduce waste volumes, to reduce the potential negative impact of the waste material and to a certain
extent recover energy.
Y Chemical-physical pre-treatment is a procedure to
stabilize waste materials before final disposal.
Y Controlled landfilling is the common method for the
final disposal of non-recyclable waste.
Figure 1: Waste management hierarchy
Y
Uncontrolled burning and dumping, often accompanied by open burning, is still the most common
method of waste disposal in developing countries,
where these pose a major threat to natural resources
and human health. This form of waste disposal
should be avoided.
about impacts on the environment when comparing
different reuse, recycling and disposal options. LCA enables governmental authorities to find the best alternatives for different wastes, so that they can develop a
waste management strategy that takes into consideration the local environmental situation, social interests,
and economical conditions. The criteria for determining the most appropriate treatment option will vary
from country to country and depend very much on the
scale of industry and the given infrastructure. Using
LCA in the environmental management system, in accordance with the ISO14001 series, can help companies
evaluate the potential for continuous improvement
and assess proposed steps.
9
27.06.2006 10:18:14 Uhr
27.06.2006 10:18:15 Uhr
5.0 Main Characteristics of co-processing
in the Cement Industry
5.1 Cement Manufacturing
Cement manufacturing is a material-intensive process.
After mining, grinding and homogenization of raw materials, the next step in cement manufacturing is calcination of calcium carbonate, followed by sintering the
resulting calcium oxide with silica, alumina, and iron
oxide at high temperatures to form clinker. The clinker
is then ground or milled with gypsum and other constituents to produce cement. Naturally occurring calcareous deposits such as limestone, marl, or chalk provide the source for calcium carbonate. Silica, iron oxide
and alumina are found in various ores and minerals,
such as sand, shale, clay, and iron ore. However, process
residues are more and more used as replacements for
the natural raw materials. Producing one ton of clinker
requires an average of 1,5 – 1,6 tons of raw materials.
Most of the material is lost from the process as carbon
dioxide emissions to air in the calcination reaction
(CaCO3 Y CaO + CO2).
Cement production also has high energy requirements, which typically account for 30-40% of the production costs (excluding capital costs). Traditionally,
the primary fuel has been coal, but a wide range of
other fuels is also used, including petroleum coke,
natural gas and oil. In addition to these fuels, various
types of waste are used as fuel. Clinker is burned in a
rotary kiln that can be part of a wet or dry long kiln
system, a semi-wet or semi-dry grate preheater (Lepol)
kiln system, a dry suspension preheater kiln system, or
a preheater/precalciner kiln system6. The best available
technique for the production of cement clinker is a dry
process kiln with multi-stage suspension preheating
and precalcination. Modern cement plants have an
energy consumption of 3,000-3,300 MJ per ton of
clinker, whereas the wet process with long kilns consumes up to 6,000 MJ per ton.
Figure 2: The process of cement production (Source: VDZ)
6 A detailed description of the different kiln types is given in the chapters 3.4 & 3.5 of the CEMBUREAU BAT document (2000). The document
can be downloaded under: http://www.cembureau.be/Documents/Publications/CEMBUREAU_BAT_Reference_Document_2000-03.pdf
11
27.06.2006 10:18:15 Uhr
The emissions from cement plants that cause the greatest concern are nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), and dust. Other important emissions to be considered are carbon oxides (CO, CO2), volatile organic compounds (VOC), dioxins (PCDDs) and furans (PCDFs), and
metals. The emission values depend mainly on input
materials (raw material and fuel), the temperature level,
and the oxygen content during the combustion stages.
In addition, kiln emissions can be influenced by flame
Characteristics
Temperature and time
Temperature at
main burner
>1450°C: material
>1800°C: flame temperature.
Residence time at
main burner
>12-15 sec and >1200°C
>5-6 sec and >1800°C
Temperature at
precalciner
>850°C: material
>1000°C: flame temperature
Residence time at
precalciner
>2 - 6 sec and >800°C
shape and temperature, combustion chamber geometry,
the reactivity of the fuel, the presence of moisture, the
available reaction time, and the burner design.
Although high temperature at the main burner is
the main reason for the formation of thermal NOx, this
heat is also able to completely destroy unwanted organic substances present in the input material, a great
environmental advantage.
Table 2: Temperature and residence time during cement production
Dust is released from cement production processes either as point source dust (kiln stack, cooler stack,
cement mill stack) or as fugitive (dispersed dust from
stockpiles, material transfer points, and road transportation). Most of the dust is pure pulverized raw material. Second in importance is clinker and cement mill
dust. The cement production process does not (with a
few local exceptions) produce liquid effluents. All water
consumed (mainly for gas cooling purposes) is released
to the atmosphere as water vapor. Surface water quality
might be impaired if storm waters flush large quantities of settled dust out of a dusty plant and directly into
adjacent small surface waters.
zation, or selective non-catalytic reduction) have lowered certain cement kiln emissions considerably.
The process, the best available technologies, and
environmental impacts are described comprehensively
in the reference document produced under the EC Integrated Pollution and Prevention process7 and in the
BAT-BEP Guidelines on Best Available Technology and
provisional guidance on best environmental practices8.
In addition, the Cement Sustainability Initiative of the
WBCSD has come up with Guidelines on co-processing
that reflect a consensus of the private sector.
The optimization of the clinker burning process
and the continuous development and introduction of
abatement techniques (such as dust filters, desulphuri-
7 http://eippcb.jrc.es
8 for example the BAT-BEP on best environmental practices relevant to Article 5 and Annex C
of the Stockholm Convention can be found under http://www.pops.int/documents/batbep_advance/default.htm
12
27.06.2006 10:18:19 Uhr
5.2 Co-processing in the Cement Industry
5.2.1 The process and its application
Co-processing refers to the use of waste materials in
industrial processes, such as cement, lime, or steel production and power stations or any other large combustion plants. Co-processing means the substitution of
primary fuel and raw material by waste, recovering
energy and material from waste. Waste materials used
for co-processing are referred to as alternative fuels and
raw materials (AFR).
Alternative raw materials are typically fed to the
kiln system in the same way as traditional raw materials, e.g. via the normal raw meal supply. Alternative raw
materials containing components that can be volatilized at low temperatures (for example, hydrocarbons)
have to be fed into the high temperature zones of the
kiln system.
Co-processing has the following characteristics
during the production process:
Y The alkaline conditions and the intensive mixing favor the absorption of volatile components from the
gas phase. This internal gas cleaning results in low
emissions of components such as SO2, HCl, and, with
the exception of mercury and thallium, this is also
true for most of the heavy metals.
Y The clinker reactions at 1450°C allow incorporation of
ashes and in particular the chemical binding of metals to the clinker.
Y The direct substitution of primary fuel by high calorific waste material causes a higher efficiency on
energy recovery in comparison to other “waste to
energy” technologies
Different feed points can be used to insert AFR
into the cement production process. The most common ones are:
Y via the main burner at the rotary kiln outlet end
Y via a feed chute at the transition chamber at the
rotary kiln inlet end (for lump fuel)
Y via secondary burners to the riser duct
Y via precalciner burners to the precalciner
Y via a feed chute to the precalciner (for lump fuel)
Y via a mid kiln valve in the case of long wet and
dry kilns (for lump fuel).
see Case Study 1: Selection of adequate feed pointsThe example of Lägerdorf, Holcim Germany ]
[Y
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
5
Clinker Cooler
Rotary Kiln
Precalciner
Raw Meal (Cyclone) Preheater
Raw Mill
Bag Filter (or Electrostatic Separator)
6
Natural and
Alternative
Raw Materials
Exhaust
Gas
Silo
Conventional and
Alternative Fuels
3
Gas Temp. Special Features
2
2000-1050 All organics burnt, fuel ash =
raw material, incorporated in clinker
3
1200-880
4 5
Clinker
1
6
880-100
80-100
SO2 and HCI trapped due to
presence of CaO
Act as a 5-stage dry scrubber
for combustion gases
99.999% dedusting effinciency
2
Figure 3: Clinker process and special characteristics (example: pre-calciner kiln)
13
27.06.2006 10:18:21 Uhr
5.2.2 Co-processing and waste management
Co-processing of waste in cement kilns offers advantages for the cement industry as well as for the authorities responsible for waste management. Cement
producers can save on fossil fuel and raw material consumption, contributing to a more eco-efficient production. One of the advantages for authorities and communities is that this waste recovery method uses an
existing facility, eliminating the need to invest in a new,
purpose-built incinerator or secure landfill site.
Co-processing should be considered in any approach to waste management. A detailed systems approach, comparing individual waste technologies and
looking at the interface of combined processes (collection, storage, recycling and disposal) will help to optimize waste management from ecological, social and
economical points of view. Tools to be applied for this
approach are material and energy flux analyses and
eco-balances.
Municipal waste is a heterogeneous material and
consists in developing countries mainly of a native organic (kitchen refuse, green cut), an inert (sand, ash)
and a post-consumer (packing material, electronic
goods) fraction. Valuable recycling material such as
cardboard, hard plastic, glass or metal are often sorted
out by the informal (rag pickers) or formal (cooperatives) sector. In some cases the organic fraction is used
for biogas production (anaerobic digestion) or for composting. What is valid for industrial waste holds also
true for municipal waste: only sorted waste with a
known composition and defined calorific value is suitable for processing as AFR. The selection has to be
based on the waste hierarchy and the social impacts of
waste recycling as income generation for the urban
poor. Whenever possible the informal sector should be
incorporated in collection and sorting activities.
See Case Study 2: An integrated waste management
concept – The example from Cartago, Costa Rica ]
[Y
Waste generators, waste segregators
Waste collection
and transport
supervised by
cement company
Private or public waste collection and haulage
uncontrolied
disposal
Pre-processing (platform)
Co-processing (kiln)
Incinerators
Landfill
Phys.-chem.
treatment
Recycling
= Activities directly related to AFR
Figure 4: Waste treatment and co-processing: The AFR chain
14
27.06.2006 10:18:26 Uhr
Compounds
Clay mineral / Al2O3
Limestone / CaCO3
Silicates / SiO2
Iron-oxide / Fe2O3
Si-Al-Ca-Fe
Sulfur
Fluorine
Waste material
Industrial sources
Y Coating
Y Foundries
residues
recycling sludge
Y Aluminum
Y Aluminum
Y Industrial
Y Neutralization
Y Lime
Y Sewage
lime
sludge
Y Foundry
sand
Y Contaminated
process
treatment
Y Foundries
soil
Y Soil
remediation
Y Roasted
pyrite
sludge
Y Red sludge
Y Metal
Y Mechanical
Y Metal
Y Fly
surface treatment
industry
Y Industrial waste water treatment
Y Incinerator
ashes
sand
Y Crushed
Y Gypsum
industry
Y Foundries
from gas desulphurization
gypsum
Y Incineration
Y Chemical
Y Neutralization
Y CaF
Y Aluminum
2 filter sludge
process
industry
Table 3: Group classification of alternative raw materials (Source: VDZ)
As cement kiln emissions are site-specific, depending on production processes and the input material, a
control and monitoring system for the incoming waste
materials and for the optimization of the feeding
points is an important aspect to be considered.
Co-processing is not only the use of waste in place
of traditional fuels, but can also recover valuable raw
materials. Y Table 3 above gives some examples on raw
material recovery from different wastes. For more information on waste selection Y see chapter 6.1.4.
15
27.06.2006 10:18:27 Uhr
5.2.3 Pre-processing: From waste to AFR
Wastes occur in different forms and qualities. The transformation of waste to AFR requires certain standards.
Some types of waste cannot be used directly as AFR, but
must undergo a preparation process. This step produces
a waste product with defined characteristics that complies with the technical specifications of cement production and guarantees that environmental standards
are met.
Waste
market /
Consumer
Collection
Transport
Preprocessing
AFR pre-processing plants usually store incoming
materials and contain grinding, mixing, and homogenization processes. They must have all the required permits and monitoring systems, for example for dust,
odor, VOC, water and noise.
see Case Study 3: Pre-processing of waste material The example of Energis, Holcim Group, in Albox, Spain ]
[Y
Transport
Coprocessing
Figure 5: From waste
to AFR: Pre-processing
operations
5.2.4 Financing of waste services and the polluter-pays principle
The market value of the waste material (positive or
The polluter-pays principle must be the basis for the
negative) fluctuates and depends on the price for fossil
economical and financial analysis of co-processing. This
fuel and primary raw materials, market competition and
means that those who are producing waste (e.g. industhe costs of alternative treatments. Normally the overall
try) or are responsible for its handling (e.g. municipality)
costs for pre- and co-processing of waste are higher
have to take care for its best, environmentally sound
than the energy and material savings so that a waste
management. The costs for this duty depend on the diffee has to be levied. In only a few cases can the waste
ferent treatment options available on the market, the
material reach a profitable market value. This occurs
energy or material value of the waste itself, the required
when the sum of the production and investment costs
technical standards and the stipulated directives of a
for AFR is lower than the market price for fossil energy
country-specific environmental policy.
and raw material.
Co-processing means additional costs to the ceMuch environmental pollution and inadequate
ment company of the collection, pre-processing, storage
waste handling comes from incorrect pricing of services
and feeding of AFR to the kiln and of quality control and
and goods. In order to assure that waste disposal is not
reporting. These costs are in general composed of runonly driven by financing criteria but also follows econing costs (staff and equipment), amortization, interests
logical concerns, market-based instruments (MBIs) such
and business risk. As supply chain structures and monias environmental taxes, incentives or compensation
toring systems improve, costs decrease.
schemes should be applied. The MBIs have to go hand in
hand with strict enforcement and penalties.
16
27.06.2006 10:18:27 Uhr
5.3 Requirements for the Implementation of co-processing
5.3.1 Institutional challenges for co-processing
Co-processing AFR presents challenges for cement
plant operators and regulators. The operators need to
understand and control all impacts that co-processing
will have on the production process, on the final product, on the environment, and on the health and safety
of the workers. Regulators should understand all these
issues in order to fulfill their roles in controlling environmental impacts and impacts on health and safety.
Both operators and regulators should understand the
concerns of the public over possible negative effects of
co-processing, and they should establish efficient communication processes in order to explain their activities
and to avoid conflicts.
In some places the challenges are more complex.
Environmental legislation does not exist in all countries.
In others, the regulatory framework may exist, but there
is no enforcement because of lack of human capacity,
awareness or resources. Most developing countries lack
information on the methodology of emission analysis
and on the evaluation of analytical data from continuous emissions monitoring. Waste statistics are more or
less nonexistent, and documentation systems for tracing waste are not known. The lack of waste management plans does not allow for a financially and ecologically optimized handling of waste streams. Thus capacity building is required for the regulatory body to ensure
environmentally sound and efficient co-processing.
5.3.2 Areas for capacity building
The following are baseline questions when considering
a capacity-building process:
Y Is the existing legislative and regulatory environmental framework appropriate for co-processing?
Y Are regulations available for the safe pre-processing
of waste? Do the authorities have sufficient regulatory capacities?
Y Does an integrated waste management plan exist
that includes the optimized use of waste material for
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
the given local circumstances? Do national and local
waste management policies need further development or updating?
Do the industry and authorities understand and use
the concept of waste hierarchy?
Are the authorities qualified to authorize, control,
and monitor co-processing? To what extent does the
administrative body need support regarding the permission and monitoring process?
Is there an effective, comprehensive quality control
system in place for waste sourcing, routine deliveries,
AFR product shipments, and the co-processing site’s
end product (clinker, cement)? Does systematic monitoring, in combination with periodic third party audits by independent institutions, ensure that the operations are in compliance with permits and other
internal or external requirements?
Is the cement plant able to comply with the need for
monitoring? Are the required equipment and trained
personnel available?
Are independent testing laboratories (national or regional service companies) available and experienced
in monitoring and controlling the quality of AFR and
emissions?
Does the cement plant interested in processing AFR
fulfill national environmental standards in using traditional fuel and raw materials?
Are adequate transport, storage, and handling of the
waste material assured? Are there cooperation agreements between the waste-producing industries and
the cement plants that allow for optimal delivery and
use of the waste material? Are the pre-treatment
operators and haulage companies authorized and
reliable?
Do adequate emergency response plans exist?
Are occupational health and safety standards assured? Are management and staff in cement industry and haulage companies sufficiently trained in
handling hazardous materials?
17
27.06.2006 10:18:29 Uhr
5.3.3 Implementation of capacity development
Capacity development is the process of strengthening
the abilities of individuals, organizations, companies,
and societies to make effective and efficient use of resources. In the context of these Guidelines, capacity
development comprises first of all the transfer of
knowledge, experience, skills and values. It includes the
improvement of management systems and the extension of networking. Change management and mediation in conflicting situations are essential parts of institutional development.
When national and local decision makers decide to
integrate co-processing into waste management systems, the legal and institutional framework must be
adapted, and those involved from both government and
business need profound knowledge of the implications
of the decision. A comprehensive capacity-building
strategy should be designed and agreed on with the
relevant stakeholders. Training could be done through or
in cooperation with bilateral and multilateral organizations (i.e. the national focal points of international conventions like Basel or Stockholm). An additional partner
for training could be the cement associations and specialized research institutes and universities. Y Annex 4
provides sources for contacts and information.
The objectives of the capacity-building strategy
could include information on legal, technical, social,
environmental and financial aspects of waste management in general and co-processing in particular. The
following chapter gives an overview of the different
areas where capacity development and training might
be required. Since conditions vary from country to country, an individual and carefully designed capacity-building strategy, including a comprehensive training concept, must be agreed on. The permitting and supervising authorities must concentrate on their coordinating
and enforcement functions. Therefore the authorities
do not need to provide all relevant knowledge and experience but can rely on external expertise. However,
the officers directly responsible for the permitting, control and enforcement procedures should have a profound understanding of co-processing. Training might
be required regarding:
Y formulation of waste management policies
Y formulation and interpretation of waste statistics
18
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
authorization and controlling of co-processing
assessment of new materials for co-processing and
waste source qualification
monitoring of operation and transportation (methodologies of emission analysis and evaluation of analytical data)
management of occupational health and safety of
the workers within the cement plant and during
transportation
enforcement of the national regulations and permissions
systematic communication with stakeholders and
the public.
Cement industry staff from various departments
(production, quality, AFR, legal, OH&S etc.) may need
training in:
Y control of wastes and AFR
Y operation of facilities for pre-processing and
co-processing according to internal regulations
Y occupational health and safety
Y communications
Y internal monitoring of environmental (emission)
aspects
Y auditing techniques and audit protocols
Y periodic re-certification for employees and subcontractors.
Reliable and well-trained external auditors, service
company personnel, and experts from the public and
private sector working in the field of waste management are needed to make co-processing work. To ensure
quality and to simplify the work of administrative bodies, the certification of recycling and haulage companies, of laboratories for internal and external controlling,
as well as of individual experts, is most important.
Waste producers and pre-treatment and haulage
companies will be involved in pre-organization and pretreatment before delivery to the cement plant. Efficiency requires the optimization of material flow, waste
separation, preparations for safe handling of the materials already at the source, and adequate installations
for transportation and storage. Management and staff
should be trained accordingly.
27.06.2006 10:18:29 Uhr
5.3.4 Implementation of the Guidelines
These Guidelines recommend environmental and social
standards as well as technical and legal requirements.
They shall not be regarded as binding law (see “imporant notice” on page B). Their application enhances
broad acceptance of co-processing waste material in
cement plants. For the implementation of the proposed
ambitious but realistic principles a stepwise approach
is required depending on the framework conditions in
the different countries.
We have to understand that the level of economical development, environmental consciousness, political
priorities, good governance or cultural habits influence
the dynamics and timeframe of the modernization of
waste management in a country. The implementation
of co-processing must be seen as a part of this change
process and will progress differently from country to
country.
The Guidelines should be implemented on the
basis of a spirit of cooperation between the public and
private sector. As this will not happen from one day to
another, a gradual phasing-in is needed, which is fixed
on the given political, social and legal circumstances
and based on achievable and realistic milestones.
The driving force for the introduction of co-processing in accordance with these Guidelines can be a
national cement association, an individual cement
company or the public sector. Whoever promotes this
activity should do it in a transparent manner and
within a defined and binding time horizon.
19
27.06.2006 10:18:30 Uhr
27.06.2006 10:18:30 Uhr
6.0 Requirements for co-processing in Cement Kilns
6.1 Legal Aspects
6.1.1 Principles
Principle 1
An appropriate legislative and regulatory framework shall be set up:
Y Co-processing shall be integrated into the overall legislation concerning environmental protection
and waste management before it can be accepted as a viable waste management alternative.
Y Legally-binding regulations and standards are necessary to guarantee legal security and to
assure a high level of environmental protection.
Y Law enforcement is the key to successful AFR implementation and marketing.
Principle 2
Baselines for traditional fuels and raw materials shall be defined:
Y Control and monitor inputs, outputs, and emissions during the operation of the cement plant
with virgin fuel and primary raw materials.
Y Evaluate the given environmental situation prior to starting waste co-processing.
Y Use this baseline data to define potential impacts of AFR on the environment based on standardized Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA).
Principle 3
All relevant authorities should be involved during the permitting process:
Y Build credibility with open, consistent, and continuous communications with the authorities.
Y Consider and strive to apply Best Available Technology (BAT).
Y The cement plant operator shall provide necessary information to enable authorities to evaluate the option of co-processing.
Y Install community advisory panels early, including the authorities, to facilitate the exchange of
ininformation, opinion and know-how.
6.1.2 The legal framework
National laws should define the basic principles under
which co-processing takes place. They should then define the concrete requirements and standards for coprocessing. Without legally binding rules, the authorities will not be able to control compliance or to enforce
environmental protection.
The regulatory framework should reflect the real
capacities of environmental authorities. Complex
standards are difficult for regulators to handle, particularly in developing countries. Clearly defined criteria
that are easy to evaluate and to apply are more appropriate.To integrate co-processing into the national
waste policies and laws, the regulatory bodies, the ce-
ment industry and other stakeholders should provide a
country and sector specific input for the national institutions formulating laws and regulations.
If no specific legislative framework covers co-processing, the cement company interested in the use of
AFR should prepare all the necessary documentation
before starting any waste co-processing or pre-processing activities, and apply for a permit under the general
environmental law in force, in close cooperation with
the authorities, basing the application on existing good
practices. International and regional experiences and
information exchange about best practices should be
considered.
21
27.06.2006 10:18:31 Uhr
6.1.3 The institutional framework
Experience from countries that allow co-processing of
waste clearly shows that it is best if the permitting
process, supervision and controlling functions are all
concentrated in one single administrative body.
Poor enforcement often stems from a lack of
awareness or of resources in terms of control and
monitoring. Thus capacity building for the regulatory
and administrative bodies may be needed [ Y see chapter 5.3 ] to ensure the environmentally sound treatment
of all the waste generated and efficient co-processing.
22
clinker production process, the raw material and fuel
compositions, the feeding points, the gas-cleaning process, the current existing local regulations, if any, and the
given waste management problems [ Y see also chapter
6.3.2 ]. The “Accept-Refuse Chart” in Y Annex 6 could be
used by plant operators to help them in considering
which type of waste is suitable for co-processing. As a
basic rule, wastes accepted as AFR must give an addedvalue for the cement kiln:
Y calorific value from the organic part
Y material value from the mineral part.
The civil servants responsible for permitting, control and supervision should have an adequate technical
background and legal knowledge. However, the authorities do not need to provide all relevant knowledge
and experience, but can make use of external expertise.
A basic requirement for the process is the availability of
qualified, reliable companies and experts.
In some cases kilns can be used for the safe disposal of special wastes such as obsolete pesticides,
PCBs, or outdated pharmaceutical products. However,
for this type of treatment, regulatory authorities and
cement plant operators must come to individual agreements and standards on a case-by-case basis. Such
disposal activity should be done as a joint effort between the public and the private sector.
6.1.4 Emission control and selection of waste:
Enforceable standards are needed
The regulatory framework must provide rules that are
easy to enforce. National emissions standards must be
applied by the concerned authorities and implemented
by permits in each case. Within the given standards, the
technical specifications for co-processing and the waste
to be used may vary from country to country or even
from one cement plant to another.
Special attention must be given to reliable emissions control and monitoring, as this is one of the most
sensitive areas of the co-processing activity. In many
countries, industrial emissions standards already exist
but do not cover emissions from cement factories using
AFR. Y chapter 6.2.2 provides a detailed overview of environmental impacts and emission control.
As documented in Y Annexes 2 and 5, a wide range
of waste materials may be used as AFR. The most common ones are mixed dirty paper, cartons, plastics, textiles, packaging material, tires, wood, and sorted wastes
from households, commerce, or production and service
industries. There are liquid waste products such as used
oil, solvents or coal slurries as end-of-line products from
the transport sector or derivates from industrial activities. Some waste materials can be delivered as single
batches directly to the cement plant while others must
be pre-processed to meet the required conditions. In
some cases (e.g. municipal garbage, hospital waste),
co-processing can only be applied after pre-processing
phases such as segregation, sorting, making inert, neutralization, or thermal treatment. Regular quality control of the collected and delivered waste will help to
ensure a smooth use of the AFR in the kiln.
Derived from the EU waste catalogue, a list of
wastes suitable for co-processing has been prepared
[ Y see Annex 5 ]. This list indicates that co-processing is
applicable for a wide range of waste and not limited to
a certain type of waste. However, the decision on what
type of waste can be finally used in a certain plant cannot be answered uniformly; it must be based on the
The quality of what goes in determines the quality
of what comes out. Therefore attention must be paid to
the selection of raw materials and fuels, whether they
come from primary or secondary sources. All natural
resources used in cement production (raw material and
fuels) contain pollutants such as heavy metals; so a preAFR baseline emissions study is recommended. Data
27.06.2006 10:18:31 Uhr
from this study helps operators to understand the pollution content of traditional inputs and to demonstrate
later whether the use of AFR offers environmental improvements.
Process requirements, product quality targets, and
emissions regulations all have a bearing on the choice
of the chemical and physical parameters of the potential waste material considered for use. In selecting and
using AFR, the aims are
Y to fulfill any legal requirements about pollution,
health, safety, and technical standards
Y to assure that the waste used as AFR undergoes its
most favorable treatment compared to possible other
technologies
Y to exclude damaging effects to the product or the
production process
Y to minimize the net financial and economic costs of
waste management.
In many countries regulators have produced lists
of maximum pollutant values allowed for selected
waste to be transferred into AFR and for the pre-processed AFR itself. Y Annex 7 gives an overview of such
values from different countries. No agreed threshold
limit values exist, as different criteria are applied, depending on the local situation. Such criteria include:
Y national environmental policies
Y significance of the impact of the cement industry in
the context of regional industrial development
Y efforts to harmonize supra regional environmental
laws and standards
Y pollutants in traditional raw materials
Y treatment alternatives for the available waste
Y fixed minimum calorific value
Y toxicity level of pollutants in waste
Y requirements for cement quality.
In all countries where co-processing will be used,
such lists should be prepared and regularly reviewed by
national or local authorities in cooperation with the ce-
9
ment associations. The aim is to define standard values
appropriate for the local circumstances and requirements (on a country-wide basis or on a plant-by-plant
approach). This sensitive task should be given special
attention during any capacity development activity.
Permits for co-processing should define the waste
that is licensed for co-processing. EU Directive 2000/76/
EC9, for example, provides explicitly in Art. 4, paragraph 4
that „the permit granted by the competent authority
for an incineration or co-incineration plant shall ... list
explicitly the categories of waste which may be treated.“ Kiln operators should respect these provisions.
The main objective of the permission and controlling process is to assure that only suitable wastes will
be used and the AFR operations run properly. Regulators
and kiln operators should be able to track the progress
of the waste through the waste treatment path, either
directly from a waste generator or through collecting/
pre-treatment companies. The quality of the material
designated for co-processing is crucial. Quality data and
emissions monitoring data form the basis for scientific
discussions with external stakeholders. They are also
helpful tools for reducing local concern and the notion
that cement plants are misused as trash bins for uncontrolled disposal of wastes.
To avoid an overload of case-by-case decisions,
permitting should be done for types of wastes; though
there are exceptions to this [ Y see Table 4 next page ].
Co-processing should only be applied if not just
one but all tangible pre-conditions and requirements of
environmental, health and safety, socio-economic and
operational criteria are fulfilled. As a consequence, not
all waste materials are suitable for co-processing.
Y Table 4 on the next page gives an overview for the
justification of waste not being recommended for coprocessing in cement plants. Further explanations on
the exclusion criteria are given in Y Annex 8.
The EC directive can be found under: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/wasteinc/newdir/2000-76_en.pdf
23
27.06.2006 10:18:32 Uhr
Enrichment of
pollutants in
the clinker
Emission
values
Electronic waste
X
X
X
Entire Batteries
X
X
X
Infectious & biol.
active medical
waste
Potential for
recycling
Landfilling as
better option
Negative impact on kiln
operation
X
X
Mineral acids and
corrosives
Explosives
OH&S
X
X
Asbestos
X
X
X
X
X
Radioactive waste
X
Unsorted
municipal waste
X
X
X
X
X
X
Table 4: List of waste material not suited for co-processing and the main reasons for the exclusion from co-processing
Cement plant operators must know the quantity
and characteristics of the available wastes before applying for a permit for co-processing. However, an
open communication channel and regular consultations between the public and the private sector will
help to reduce possible friction and misunderstandings and to develop a permit process most suitable
for all involved.
6.1.5 Permitting process for co-processing
Generic permits for heterogeneous waste groups should
not be issued because it is hard to track these wastes
from the generator to the kiln. And it is difficult to assess their environmental impact. It is important to
know the origin of each type of waste and its composition in order to ensure safe co-processing. Agreements
must be signed with the collectors or haulage companies in order to ensure these requirements.
Generic permits shall only be issued for homogeneous waste including waste coming from pre-processing facilities, for example:
Y solid substitute fuels (impregnated sawdust,
refuse derived fuels, fluff)
Y liquid substitute fuels
24
and for waste types with a defined characteristic and
a successful long-term application in cement plants
(e.g. tires).
Pre-processing facilities accept different waste
materials suitable for co-processing that due to their
physical states cannot always be fed directly to the
plant. It is therefore necessary to prepare from these
wastes a single waste stream in the form of a liquid or
solid substitute fuel that complies with the administrative and technical specifications of the cement plants.
In this case the traceability is ensured.
Cement plant operators who co-process wastes
have the main responsibility for the whole procedure,
including permitting and quality assurance. Their applications must include detailed descriptions of all relevant processes within the plant, comprehensive data
about all materials designated for co-processing and a
detailed self-monitoring plan. These documents give
the authorities an overview of the quality of the waste
and the expected emissions. The authorities should not
accept incomplete application documents.
27.06.2006 10:18:32 Uhr
Operators should apply for a permit only after
considering the following elements:
Y the cement process (raw material, fossil fuels,
type of kiln etc.)
Y the characteristics of the waste market
Y nearby waste markets, for possible trans-boundary
shipments.
A well-documented permitting process should
provide detailed information on the plant specifications [ Y see the attached permit procedure as model
case in Annex 9] and give information on:
Y raw materials, fuels, co-processed wastes and fuels,
handling and preparation
Y expected volumes per waste stream
Y feeding point into the process for each waste stream
Y chemical/physical criteria of each waste stream
Y main items of equipment including plant capacity
and operating conditions (i.e. temperature and pressure), where relevant to pollution potential
Y pollutant abatement equipment: scrubbers, filters,
absorbers, precipitators, etc
Y release points
Y intermediary products, waste handling, conditioning,
and storage
Y inspection plan for incoming waste and pre-processed AFR
Y sources of water and treatment used for process cooling water, effluent water etc, where relevant to pollution potential or release
Y description of the emission situation: technology for
preventing pollution, contents and quantities of
emissions
Y description of secondary fuels, generation, processing,
using installation, supply and quality assurance system
Y investigation of the future harmful effects of pollutants in the plant’s sphere of influence (sphere of influence is an assessment area within a radius of 50
times the stack height)
– chemical/ physical reactions of emitted substances
– potential dangers, toxicological and environmental
relevance
– loads and protection factors in the plant’s sphere of
influence
– emission load of relevant components
– pathways, periods of time, and circumferences of
effects that require protection
– suitable measures for avoiding pollutants’ environmental effects
– the emission values ascertained in the assessment
areas are compared with various references, limiting values, and guide numbers for the background;
pollutants to be considered in relation to the production of cement are dust, NOx, SO2, VOC, heavy
metals, and PCDDs/PCDFs
Y maintenance of industrial and occupational health
and safety standards
Y description of methods of informing the public.
When the application is completed (an example
for an application form is attached as Y Annex 10), the
authorities should be asked for review and instruction.
However, continuous communications with the authorities can avoid delays in the permit process
[ Y for a flow chart of the permit process, see Annex 11 ]
The roles and responsibility of the cement company making the application include:
Y making first contact with the competent authority
and statutory consulting authority
Y preparing application forms, application for modifications in fuels and raw materials with major changes
in the process
Y organizing discussions about the procedure and public participation
Y a written identification, description, and assessment
of the effects of the planned activity.
The roles and responsibilities of the permit issuing
authority are:
Y considering the application and all the forms
Y involving other authorities in the consultation process (health, transportation, economy)
Y public participation: public information, public inspection of an application, public hearing
Y environmental assessment
Y risk assessment evaluation with interdisciplinary teams
Y final decision on approval by the competent authority
(with additional stipulations i.e. imposition, condition, time limitation, reservation as to revocation).
[ Y see Case Study 4: Aspects on permitting The example of North Rhine Westfalia, Germany ]
25
27.06.2006 10:18:33 Uhr
6.1.6 Baseline testing - trial burn testing
Kiln emissions (with the exception of NOx and some
heavy metals) are produced by volatile components in
the raw materials that volatilize during preheating of
these materials (i.e. in the cyclone preheater of a precalciner kiln). Volatile components are hardly ever homogeneously distributed in a deposit (quarry) and thus
their amounts fluctuate over days and years depending
on the part of the quarry being exploited. Dynamic
processes of formation and reduction during internal
circulation, as well as the kiln operation modes, also affect emissions.
An emission change forecast based on expert
know-how and, if required, expulsion testing and chemical analyses would provide good information. However,
many authorities and external stakeholders prefer
emissions measurements.
26
In case a trial burn testing is required, the following simple rules and regulations should be applied for
the testing procedures:
Y the baseline test takes place over four to six days
without the AFR in question, during which:
– dust, SO2, NOx, and VOC are measured continuously
– HCl, NH3, benzene, PCDDs/PCDFs and heavy metals
are measured
Y The trial burn test is identical to the baseline test but
includes the AFR.
For the co-processing of highly hazardous wastes
(such as pesticides and PCB-related wastes), a trial burn
should be performed to demonstrate 99,9999% destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) and destruction
efficiency (DE). A detailed description of test burns for
performance verification can be found in Y Annex 12.
27.06.2006 10:18:33 Uhr
6.2 Environmental Aspects of Cement Production and AFR pre-processing
6.2.1 Principles
Principle 4
Rules must be observed:
Y The use of AFR does not have a negative impact on the emissions from a cement kiln stack, if
the following rules are observed:
– all alternative fuels must be fed directly into the high-temperature zones of a kiln system
(i.e. via main burner, mid kiln, transition chamber, secondary (riser duct) firing, precalciner firing)
– the same is true for alternative raw materials with elevated amounts of volatile matter (or
ganics, sulfur)
– the concentration of pollutants in alternative materials for which the cement process has
insufficient retention capability (like Hg) shall be limited
Y Cement production lines shall be equipped with a system capable of feeding operation filter
dust directly to the cement mills.
Principle 5
Emission monitoring is obligatory:
Y Emissions must be monitored in order to demonstrate:
– compliance with the national regulations and agreements
– compliance with corporate rules
– the reliability of the initial quality control of the process input materials.
Principle 6
Pre-processing of waste is required for certain waste streams:
Y For optimum operation, kilns require very uniform raw material and fuel flows in terms of
quality and quantity. This can only be achieved for certain types of waste by pre-processing
the waste.
Principle 7
Environmental impact assessments (EIA) confirm compliance with environmental standards:
Y Risk assessments are an efficient way to identify weaknesses in the system.
Y Material flux and energy flow analyses help to optimize the use of resources.
6.2.2 Significant emissions
Each country must define its pollutant parameters and
threshold values for industrial emissions taking into
consideration the overall economic and industrial development. In Europe, for example, such emissions are
defined by the European Waste Incineration Directive
(2000/76/EC) and the European Polluting Emissions
Register (EPER, 96/61/EC, Y see Annex 13). The latter covers 50 pollutants and gives reporting threshold values
for releases to air and water (kg/year). In Europe no cement kiln emissions to soil and water reach EPER
threshold values. The US has a similar register.
10
Cement plants. Air emissions and kiln air emissions considered to be of importance by the European
Waste Incineration Directive as well as by EPER include:
Y Dust10, SO , NO (sum of NO and NO ), CO, VOC
2
x
2
Y HCl, HF, NH , PCDDs/PCDFs, benzene
3
Y Hg, Tl, Cd and other heavy metals.
Emissions monitoring and reporting should include the
components outlined in Y Table 5 on page 28. These requirements for air emissions monitoring at cement
plants are ambitious but recommended as standards
for air emissions regulations.
Total clean gas dust, after de-dusting equipment. In the case of kiln main stacks, more than 95% of the clean gas dust
has PM10 quality, i.e. is particulate matter (PM) smaller than 10 microns.
27
27.06.2006 10:18:34 Uhr
Calculation and reporting on greenhouse gases
(CO2 emissions) is done according to the Cement CO2
Protocol of the WBCSD11.
Due to the volatile nature of mercury, special attention should be given to the mercury content of the
material used for clinker production (conventional or
alternative raw materials and fuel) and to operational
procedures.
MERCURY
Mercury (Hg) is bio-accumulative, a health hazard, and
is highly toxic to humans in all its chemical forms. It is a
comparatively rare element, with an average concentration in the earth’s crust of only 0.00005%. It is found
both naturally and as an introduced contaminant in
the environment. Because of its volatile nature and its
presence in fossil fuels being used in many industrial
processes, mercury is released into the atmosphere from
a wide variety of anthropogenic emission sources.
It is also found in nearly all cement raw materials
and mineral coals. The mercury can enter the cement
process via raw materials and fossil fuels in different
quantities. An additional source of mercury in the kiln
can be the co-processing of mercury-containing waste,
e.g. pesticides, sludge, etc. Due to its physical nature,
mercury is not captured in the clinker matrix. It forms
gaseous compounds that are not retained in the rotary kiln and preheater area. Instead, gaseous compounds condense on the raw material particles in the
raw mill and dust collector area during compound
(mill on) operation. Thus mercury accumulates in the
external material cycle during compound operation
and escapes into the environment during direct (mill
Component
Monitoring Frequency
Dust, SO2, NOx, CO, VOC
Continuously
HCl, NH3,
Benzene, Hg, heavy metals
Dioxins, Furans (PCDDs/
PCDFs)
At least once a year
Table 5: Frequency of emission monitoring for significant components
down) operation phases. Mercury emissions can be
minimized by implementing an external bypass, feeding direct operation filter dust to the cement mills. To
reduce mercury emissions, it may also become necessary to limit the mercury input into the kiln system via
the feed materials (conventional and alternative raw
materials and fuel).
The EU Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC
as well as the USA MACT rule for the incineration of
hazardous wastes limit mercury emissions to 0.05
mg/Nm3, a threshold limit value that should be respected by all cement plant operators. Cement kilns
have no problem complying with this limit under regular conditions. This is also true if alternative fuels are
used to replace fossil ones. Responsible use of AFR includes testing of incoming critical materials for their
Hg contents and refraining from using them if Hg
content is high. Eco-balances carried out in Germany
for comparing ecological differences between coprocessing and other forms of waste treatment revealed that only mercury has to be seen as a “risky”
element for co-processing.
AFR pre-processing plants.
In the guidance document to the EPER, the following
potential air emissions are mentioned for waste management activities:
CH4, CO, CO2, NH3, NOx, SOx, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn,
HCB, PCDDs/PCDFs, TCM, TCE, PAH, HCl, HF, VOC and dust.
11
28
It is unlikely that normal emissions to air, soil, and
water from AFR pre-processing plants would reach EPER
threshold limit values for any of the pollutants. Nevertheless, emission monitoring and reporting must be
performed according to locally applicable regulations.
Report on CO2 Accounting and Reporting Standard for the Cement Industry. http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/cement-tf1.pdf
27.06.2006 10:18:34 Uhr
6.2.3 Generation of emissions and reduction techniques
Cement plants.
Air emissions: Reasons for air emissions from cement
production, emission ranges, and appropriate reduction
techniques can be found in Y Annex 14. Since there is no
significant change in emissions with state-of-the-art
co-processing, the Annex also applies for co-processing.
Water and soil: Cement plants, as a rule, do not emit
industrially polluted water. They do produce domestic
waste water from various plant sections. These effluents are discharged to the plant’s or to public wastewater treatment facilities. Impacts on soil can originate
from fugitive dust emissions and are normally limited
to the plant (and quarry) area. The growth of vegetation
may be impaired by dust deposits.
Noise: It is usually generated by fans and compressors,
speed reducers, ball mills, planetary coolers and traffic.
Countermeasures are routine and include noise barriers, noise damping and housing, or, ideally, placing cement plants far from human settlements. Health and
safety of employees and residents usually require a mix
of all these abatement measures.
AFR pre-processing plants
Air emissions: Emissions to air from an AFR pre-processing plant will depend on the types of wastes treated
and the processes used. Emissions of dust and VOC
should be expected, and proper abatement techniques
should be in place. Common reduction techniques for
VOC include a nitrogen trap, biological treatment, activated carbon and thermal treatment. Dust is usually
reduced by bag filters.
Water and soil: Releases to water and soil from an AFR
pre-processing plant will depend on the types of wastes
treated and the processes used. Proper abatement
techniques should be in place. According to the degree
and nature of the pollution agents and to the output
(surface water, on-site water treatment, collective industrial, or urban station), different reduction techniques for water may be used alone or combined:
Y settling, hydrocarbons/oils/sludge separators
Y activated carbon (should be sufficient for water with
low contamination levels)
Y physical-chemical treatment
Y biological treatment
Y thermal treatment (for highly polluted water).
The by-products of such efforts (used activated
carbon, sludge, hydrocarbons, oils etc.) can be reintroduced into the cement production process for recovery/
elimination or directed to external treatments plants.
Odor and noise: AFR processing can be a significant
source of odor, but effects will depend on the types of
wastes treated and the processes used. Proper abatement techniques should be in place. Common reduction techniques for odor include nitrogen trap, biological treatment, activated carbon, and thermal treatment. Countermeasures for noise are routine and are
covered above.
29
27.06.2006 10:18:35 Uhr
6.2.4 Monitoring and reporting of emissions
Cement plants
Air emissions: The following parameters should be
measured in all plants (see EC-Directive 2000-76-EC;
the threshold limit values for these parameters are
given in Y see Annex 15 ):
Y continuously: dust, SO , NO , and VOC
2
x
Y at least once a year: HCl, NH , Benzene, PCDDs/PCDFs,
3
Hg, and other heavy metals.
Reliable on-line monitors should be used for continuous measurements. For the once-a-year measurements, companies must select national or international
service companies. All emission data must, for sake of
worldwide comparability (benchmarking), be converted
to and given in the same units as daily averages (mg of
…/Nm3, dry gas at 10% O2 content).
During the once-a-year measurements, the service
companies must measure dust, SO2, NOx, and VOC and
compare results to the respective averages of the continuous measurements in the same time period. In case of
significant deviations, continuous and discontinuous
measurements must be checked for accuracy. For
continuous measurements, standardized reporting includes:
Y yearly average of the daily averages
Y number of daily averages exceeding a limit value
Y standard deviation of the daily averages.
Standardized reporting for periodic measurements
includes the arithmetical mean value of all (if more
than one) measurements within one year.
Soil and water: Cement plants do not produce cementspecific waste water, but do produce domestic sewage
water that is normally piped to a plant-owned or public
sewage facility. Standard procedures are used to monitor effluent water quality and to adjust the cleaning
process.
Dust: If volatile matter such as metal and organics gets
into the system then it may become part of the dust
from main stacks. In cases of electrostatic precipitator shutdowns, this material can be emitted and af-
30
fect soils near the stacks. In a state-of-the-art cement
plant, part of the direct operation filter dust is separated and fed to the cement mill, thus keeping such pollutants from building up in the dust circuit, being emitted,
and polluting the soil.
Odor and noise: No monitoring methods for these
issues specific to cement production are known. Monitoring odor and noise follows routine practices. Whereas noise measurements are sometimes done in and
around a cement plant, odor measurements are cumbersome, complex, unreliable, and comparatively costly.
No case is known of an odor measurement in or around
a cement plant.
[ Y see Case Study 5: Emissions monitoring and reporting
(EMR) - The experiences from Holcim ]
AFR pre-processing plants
Air emissions: AFR pre-processing plants should be inspected and emission samples taken by an independent testing laboratory at least once a year. The coverage
of the inspection and emission testing shall be written
in the permit/license condition of the treatment facility.
The testing company must comply with the requirements of local regulations, both with regards to competence and reporting.
Soil and water: Cleaning and process water may be a
significant source of pollution to water. Discharge limit
values for pollutants should be an integral part of the
permit, and compliance must be monitored and reported. With the exception of accidents, emissions to
soil and groundwater are not expected. However, an
independent baseline investigation of the pollution
level of groundwater and soil should be performed prior
to construction or start up of waste treatment in case
of future allegations and liabilities.
Odor and noise: Due to the relatively low noise level
expected, no specific monitoring is usually requested.
However, measures can be taken for the health and
safety of workers and for environmental impact evaluation, notably when new equipment is commissioned.
27.06.2006 10:18:35 Uhr
Odor measurements can be complex and unreliable.
However, an independent baseline investigation of the
odor and noise levels should be performed prior to construction or start up of waste treatment in case of
future complaints from neighbors and future allegations and liabilities.
[ Y see Case Study 6: Pre-processing of waste material –
The example of Ecoltec, Mexico ]
6.2.5 Environmental impact of pollutants in products
Some heavy metals (e.g. Hg, Tl, Cd, Sb, As, Pb, Cr) are called
pollutants because if taken up by living organisms in
excessive quantities, they can affect health. The same applies to organic pollutants (e.g. PCDDs/PCDFs). As heavy
metals are present in all feed materials (conventional and
AFR), some will be found in the final cement product.
The heavy metal content of clinker made without
AFR varies significantly depending on the geographical
and/or geological location of the raw materials. Lengthy
investigations have shown that the effect of AFR on the
heavy metals content of clinker is marginal on a statistical basis. The one exception is that the bulk use of
tires will raise zinc levels.
Organic pollutants in the materials fed to the high
temperature zone of the kiln system are completely
destroyed, and the inorganic ashes are incorporated
into the end product.
Mortar and concrete act as a “multi barrier” system against the release of metals due to the:
Y incorporation of metals in the crystal structure
of clinker
Y incorporation of metals in the hydration product
in cement
Y formation of insoluble minerals
Y encapsulation of metals in the dense structure
of concrete.
6.2.6 Leaching of incorporated pollutants from concrete
Assessments of the environmental quality of cement
and concrete are typically based on the leaching characteristics of heavy metals to water and soil. Various
exposure scenarios must be considered:
Y exposure of concrete structures in direct contact with
groundwater (“primary” applications)
Y exposure of mortar or concrete to drinking water in
distribution (concrete pipes) or storage systems (concrete tanks); (these are „service life“ applications)
Y reuse of demolished and recycled concrete debris in
new aggregates, road constructions, dam fillings etc.
(“secondary” or „recycling“ applications)
Y dumping of demolished concrete debris in landfills
(“end-of-life” applications).
The leaching of trace elements from concrete within
the environmentally relevant pH values (7 to 11) is a diffusion-controlled (i.e. extremely slow) process. But all
metals do not share the same principal leaching characteristics.
The main results of the many leaching studies
done to asses the environmental impacts of heavy metals embedded in concrete are as follows:
Y the leached amounts of all trace elements from
monolithic concrete (service life and recycling) are
below or close the detection limits of the most sensitive analytical methods
Y no significant differences in leaching behavior of
trace elements have been observed between different types of cements produced with or without alternative fuels and raw materials
Y the leaching behavior of concrete made with different cement types is similar
Y however, leached concentrations of some elements
such as chromium, aluminum and barium may, under
certain test conditions, come close to limits given in
drinking water standards; hexavalent chromium in
cement is water-soluble and may be leached from
concrete at a level higher than other metals; so chromium inputs to cement and concrete should be as
limited as possible
Y laboratory tests and field studies have demonstrated
that applicable limit values (e.g. groundwater or
drinking water specifications) are not exceeded as
long as the concrete structure remains intact (e.g. in
primary or „service life“ applications)
31
27.06.2006 10:18:36 Uhr
Y certain
metals such as arsenic, chromium, vanadium,
antimony, or molybdenum (so-called „oxyanions“)
may have a more mobile leaching behavior, especially
when the mortar or concrete structure is destroyed
through crushing or other size-reduction processes
(e.g. in recycling stages such as use as aggregates in
road foundations, or in end-of-life scenarios such as
landfilling)
Y as there are no simple and consistent relations between the leached amounts of trace elements and
their total concentrations in concrete or in cement,
the trace element content of cements cannot be used
as environmental criteria.
In cases where the concentration of heavy metals
exceeds the normal range found in cements made
without AFR, leaching tests should be conducted.
For different, real-life concrete and mortar exposure scenarios, different leaching tests and assessment
procedures must be applied. Existing standardized test
procedures have been developed mainly for waste regulations and drinking water standards. There remains a
need for harmonized and standardized compliance test
procedures based on the exposure scenarios as outlined above.
6.2.7 Special comments regarding Dioxins and Furans
The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) lists cement kilns burning hazardous
waste as a potential source of PCDDs/PCDFs emissions.
Though there are exceptions, PCDDs/PCDFs emissions
from cement kilns are normally less than 0.1 ng I-TEQ/
3
Nm and seem to be independent of using AFR or not.
The Stockholm Convention also regulates HCB and
PCBs and is requesting more data from the industry.
WBCSD has done a comprehensive study of POPs
and co-processing (summary of the report: Y see
Annex 16 ). The study found that:
Y cement kilns, with a few exceptions, do not emit
PCDDs/PCDFs in any significant amounts
Y if PCDDs/PCDFs emissions are produced, they are
usually reaction products from organic compounds in
the raw materials, volatilized from the raw meal and
acting as precursor materials in the new-formation of
PCDDs/PCDFs in cooler parts of the process
Y long wet and long dry process kiln technology is somewhat more susceptible to PCDDs/PCDFs emissions than
modern cyclone preheater/precalciner technology
Y PCDDs/PCDFs emissions seem to be independent of
the use of alternative fuels if the general principles of
good process control are observed.
[ Y see Case Study 7: Test burns with PCDDs/PCDFs
Monitoring - The Philippine Examples ]
DIOXINS AND FURANS
Any chlorine introduced to the kiln system in the presence
of organic material may cause the formation of polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated
dibenzofurans (PCDFs) in combustion and wet-chemical
processes. PCDDs and PCDFs can form after the preheater
in the air pollution control device if chlorine, hydrocarbon
precursors from the raw materials and time are available in sufficient quantities. The formation of dioxins and
furans is known to occur by de novo synthesis within the
temperature window between 250-4500C. Thus it is important that the exit gas are cooled rapidly through this
range. Due to the long residence time in the kiln and the
high temperatures, emissions of PCDDs and PCDFs are
32
generally low during steady kiln conditions. In Europe cement production is rarely a significant source of PCDDs/
PCDFs emissions The reported data indicate that kilns can
comply with an emission concentration of 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm3,
which is the limit value in the European legislation for hazardous waste incineration plants (Council Directive 94/67/
EC). German measurements at 16 cement clinker kilns (suspension preheater kilns and Lepol kilns) indicate that the
average concentration amounts to about 0.02 ng TE/m3.
Source: Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC):
Reference Document on the Best Available Technology in
Cement and Lime Manufacturing Industries, 12/2001
27.06.2006 10:18:36 Uhr
6.2.8 Management of kiln and bypass dust
In cases of excessive intake of chlorines with feed materials, cement kilns develop operational problems due
to sticking of the processed materials. Such problems
are solved by extracting part of the kiln gases at the
point of highest chlorine concentration. Upon air
quenching, the chlorines condense on dust particles
and can then be removed from the system by means of
de-dusting devices. The resulting intermediate or byproduct is called bypass dust (BpD).
In some cases, particularly in the US, the market
requires low-alkali cements. Alkali volatilization is enhanced by chlorine addition. Both are then removed
with a bypass-system generating BpD.
If alkali removal is done in long wet or long dry
kilns then a different type of dust, called cement kiln
dust (CKD, moderate enrichment levels) is produced.
Both BpD and CKD can be minimized and can be
added to cements (if local standards allow) but cannot
in some cases be completely re-used. Thus landfilling
might be needed.
Y If landfilling cannot be avoided, it must be done according to the rules of controlled landfilling
Y BpD and CKD must be compacted to prevent wind
erosion, and the exposed face must be minimized
Y Effluents must be collected and treated before release.
33
27.06.2006 10:18:37 Uhr
6.3 Operational Issues
6.3.1 Principles
34
Principle 8
The sourcing of waste and AFR is essential:
Y Traceability of waste helps to avoid undesired emissions, to minimize operational risks and to
ensure final product quality.
Y Traceability shall be ensured at the pre- or co-processing facility from reception up to final
treatment.
Y Business agreements with regular customers (waste producers, waste handling companies)
shall include quality and delivery criteria to allow for a uniform waste stream.
Y Waste categories unsuitable for co-processing should be refused.
Y All candidate (new) wastes will be subject to a detailed source qualification test procedure
prior to acceptance.
Principle 9
Materials transport, handling, and storage must be monitored:
Y General Guidelines for waste and AFR transportation must comply with regulatory requirements.
Y Instructions and adequate equipment for transport, handling, and storage of solid and liquid
wastes and AFR are provided and maintained regularly.
Y Conveying, dosing, and feeding systems are designed to minimize fugitive dust emissions, to
prevent spills, and to avoid toxic or harmful vapors.
Y Adequate spill response and emergency plans must be developed, implemented, and communicated to plant employees ( Y see also 6.4.3).
Principle 10
Operational aspects must be considered:
Y AFR will be fed to the kiln system only at appropriate introduction points determined by the
characteristics of the AFR.
Y The technical conditions of the plant that influence emissions, product quality, and capacity
will be carefully controlled and monitored.
Y For start-up, shut-down, or upset conditions of the kiln, the strategy dealing with the AFR feed
has to be documented and must be accessible to operators.
Principle 11
Quality control system is a must:
Y Documented control plans for wastes and AFR must be developed and implemented at each
pre-processing or co-processing site.
Y Procedures, adequate equipment, and trained personnel for the control of wastes and AFR
must be provided.
Y Appropriate protocols in case of non-compliance with given specifications must be implemented and communicated to operators.
Principle 12
Monitoring and auditing allow transparent tracing:
Y Monitoring and auditing protocols for waste and AFR management in pre- and co-processing
installations are developed and implemented.
Y Instructions and adequate training of company staff in performing internal audits are provided.
27.06.2006 10:18:37 Uhr
6.3.2 Waste and AFR sourcing
The potential use of a waste as AFR at a pre- or coprocessing site requires a careful selection process to
make sure that the material meets given external and
internal specifications and other requirements.
Prior to acceptance of a waste, the waste will be
subject to a detailed qualification process consisting of
the following steps:
Y identification of the generator of the candidate
waste
Y evaluation of existing information, such as
– business activity or process type of waste generation
– intermediate disposal, storage, or treatment of the
waste
– physical and chemical characteristics of the waste;
– health and safety data and hazards classification
(Materials Safety Data Sheets etc.)
– existing stock volumes and expected monthly delivery rates
– transport conditions (waste codes, transport codes,
packaging, transport mode, legal requirements)
Y full-scale testing of a representative waste sample
including at least all chemical and physical characteristics listed in the operational permit and in the plant
specifications
Y comparison against given specifications
Y creation of a “master data file” of the candidate waste
[ Y see Annex 17 as example ]
Y in case of acceptance of candidate waste: contract
and arrangement for waste deliveries.
Wastes listed under Y chapter 6.1.4 and wastes
with insufficient, doubtful, or unreliable information
will not be accepted.
6.3.3 Materials transport, handling and storage
Transport, storage, and handling of waste materials –
especially those with hazardous characteristics – are
frequently subject to detailed legal requirements and/
or other regulations. These local, national, and international (e.g. Basel Convention) requirements or regulations must be observed. The following good management practices and commitments shall be adopted.
Guidelines for transportation. Only authorized transporters will be selected to deliver waste and AFR to the
pre- and co-processing site. Owners and/or operators of
transport equipment shall
Y provide evidence of proper maintenance of their
equipment
Y employ only trained operators
Y comply with all relevant regulations and legal requirements in accordance with the nature of the
materials delivered
Y strictly observe procedures and protocols of the
manufacturing site when on plant property.
The pre- or co-processing site will inform transport
owners and operators about applicable requirements
and procedures inside the property. The pre- or coprocessing site shall request the waste suppliers to provide evidence about appropriate training of operators.
Guidelines for internal transport, handling and storage.
Internal transport, storage, and handling of wastes and
AFR shall be done in a manner to prevent the possibility
of spills and groundwater/soil contamination, to minimize the risk of fire or explosion, to control fugitive dust
from dry materials, and to contain volatile components,
odors and noise.
The pre-processing and co-processing site shall:
and specify procedures and instructions for
unloading, handling and storage of solid and liquid
fuels and raw materials
Y provide sufficient and adequate storage capacity and
handling installations
Y implement and communicate detailed spill response
and emergency response plans
Y implement adequate fugitive dust controls during
plant transport, unloading, conveying, and reclaiming
from storage sites
Y control wind erosion and water run-off from stockpiles
Y apply fire and explosion safe design for all installations in accordance with the nature of the materials
Y provide adequate installations and equipment for
suppression or containment of volatile gaseous components
Y ensure adequate protective equipment and training
available for workers on-site.
Y develop
35
27.06.2006 10:18:38 Uhr
6.3.4 Operational aspects
Safe and responsible use of AFR requires careful selection of the feed points in the kiln system as well as
comprehensive operational control according to the
specific characteristics and volumes of the AFR.
Guidelines for feed point selection
Adequate feed points will be selected according to the
physical, chemical, and (if relevant) toxicological characteristics of the AFR used [ Y see Figure 6 ].
Alternative fuels are always fed into the high-temperature combustion zones of the kiln system. The
physical and chemical natures of the fuel determine
the exact feed point, i.e. either the main burner, the
precalciner burner, the secondary firing at the preheater, or the mid-kiln (for long dry and wet kilns). Alternative fuels containing stable toxic components should
be fed to the main burner to ensure complete combustion due to the high temperature and the long retention time.
Feeding of alternative raw materials containing
volatile (organic and inorganic) components to the kiln
via the normal raw meal supply is forbidden unless it
has been demonstrated by controlled test runs in the
kiln or by adequate laboratory tests that undesired
stack emissions can be avoided.
Guidelines for kiln operation control
The application of AFR should not negatively affect
smooth and continuous kiln operation, the product
quality, or the site’s environmental performance. Therefore, a constant quality and feed rate of the AFR must
be assured.
The impact of AFR on the total input of circulating
volatile elements such as chlorine, sulfur, or alkalis is
assessed very carefully prior to acceptance, as they may
cause operational troubles in a kiln. Specific acceptance
criteria for these components are set individually by the
site based on the process type and on the specific kiln
conditions.
The general principles of good operational control
of the kiln system using conventional fuels and raw
materials are applied. In particular, all relevant process
parameters are measured, recorded, and evaluated continuously. Kiln operators are trained accordingly, with
special focus on requirements related to the use of AFR
- including OH&S and environmental emission aspects.
For start-up, shut-down, or upset conditions of the
kiln, written work instructions describing the strategy
to disconnect or reduce the AFR feed should be available and known to the kiln operators.
The mineral content of AFR may change the characteristics of the clinker. The raw mix composition
must be adjusted accordingly to stick to the given
chemical set points. Input limits for chlorine, sulfur,
and alkalis must be defined, and operational set points
must be strictly observed. Bypass installations to increase AFR use shall only be considered if appropriate
solutions for the management of the bypass dust generated have been identified. Uncontrolled landfilling of
bypass dust is not acceptable.
Figure 6: Possible feed points for AFR
36
27.06.2006 10:18:38 Uhr
Use of AFR is based on state-of-the-art technology
for conventional fuels and raw materials. Essential
technical developments and improvements will be
evaluated and adapted if needed.
6.3.5 Quality control system
Each site, pre-processing or co-processing, must establish a comprehensive quality control system for waste
source qualification, routine deliveries, AFR product shipments, and the co-processing site for its end product
(clinker, cement).
Guidelines for procedures, equipment and training
Documented work instructions (standard operating
procedures) for sampling, analytical tests, sample storage, laboratory equipment management (calibration,
maintenance etc.), administrative procedures and validation of results must be available and communicated
to the service personnel.
Adequate laboratory design, infrastructure, and
sampling and test equipment must be provided and
maintained to enable all required tests corresponding
to the waste/AFR types and the control plan.
Guidelines for control plans
The model control scheme [ Y see Annex 18 ] illustrates
the control of wastes and AFR. The control plan must be
developed in cooperation with the commercial department responsible for waste sourcing, and with the waste
pre-processor and/or cement plant management.
Service personnel must be adequately trained according to the specific needs and to the nature of the
wastes or AFR. Documented training plans and training
records are to be developed and kept for reference. The
training includes OH&S and environmental aspects.
Guidelines for non-compliance cases
Delivery controls in routine operations must be
carried out for each individual shipment. Delivery control has an administrative part (document control,
waste/AFR certificate identification, transport certificate control etc.) and an analytical part (sampling,
tests/analysis, comparison against specifications).
The detailed control plan depends on the origin
and nature of the waste or AFR and contains specifications on identification codes, responsibilities, sampling
location and frequency, type of analytical tests, test
frequency, and permit requirements.
In pre-processing plants, each batch of treated AFR
has to be controlled prior to dispatch to the cement
plant or prior to transfer to the feed tanks or silos. Test
samples and test results must be stored or filed for a
defined period of time. Comparison tests must be carried out periodically in order to verify and improve the
analytical performance of the control laboratory.
[ Y see Case Study 8: AFR Quality control laboratory - The
example of Resotec in Brasil ]
Written protocols and instructions must be available
detailing measures in case of non-compliance with
given specifications or regulations. Suppliers of the
waste or AFR must be informed about non-compliance
deliveries.
If explanations given by the supplier are not satisfactory, the shipment must be rejected, and the authorities must be notified (if this is required in the permit).
Test results must be evaluated for each supplier
on a statistical basis in order to assess the performance
and reliability of the waste/AFR supplier, and in order to
periodically review the contract.
Guidelines for end-product control
Final products such as clinker or cement are subject to
regular control procedures required by the usual quality
specifications as laid down in applicable national or international quality standards.
37
27.06.2006 10:18:43 Uhr
6.3.6 Monitoring and auditing
Systematic monitoring of a site’s performance in combination with periodic auditing shall ensure that the site’s
operations are always in compliance with all operating
permits and other internal or external requirements.
Guidelines for monitoring and auditing
The company shall conduct systematic and periodic audits to ensure compliance with its waste operating permit, with regulatory requirements, and with internal
standards and Guidelines as stated in Y Operational Principles 8-12. The company shall train selected personnel
from various departments (production, quality, AFR, legal,
OH&S etc.) in auditing techniques and audit protocols.
Audit reports with main conclusions and recommendations are submitted to senior management for
review. Senior management must take actions in order
to ensure that root causes for non-compliance are
evaluated and non-compliance cases are eliminated.
Additional third party audits (by independent institutions) should be carried out periodically to verify or
complete the audit findings of the company’s internal
audit team.
Internal audits are carried out at least once per
year. These audits may be carried out in combination
with the audits as required by the ISO 9001/14001 management systems. Written work instructions and audit
protocols (including checklists) must be developed and
provided by the company.
38
27.06.2006 10:18:43 Uhr
6.4 Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S)
6.4.1 Principles
Principle 13
Site suitability avoids risks:
Y Proper location (environmental, proximity to populations of concern, impact of logistics/
transport); good infrastructure (technical solutions for vapors, odors, dust, infiltration into
ground or surface waters, fire protection etc.) and properly trained management and
employees with regard to the handling and processing of AFR can all minimize risks.
Principle 14
Safety and security:
Y Each site must have a unit for safety and security.
Y A risk manager is responsible for the arrangement and performance of the unit.
Principle 15
Documentation and information is a must:
Y Documentation and information are the basis for openness and transparency about
health and safety measures.
Y Information must be available for employees and authorities before starting any coprocessing activity.
Principle 16
Training should be provided at all levels:
Y Management should be trained before starting with co-processing at a new facility or site.
Field visits at already existing facilities are strongly recommended.
Y Hazardous operations training for new workers and sub-contractors should be completed
before starting with co-processing. Periodic re-certification should be done for employees
and sub-contractors. Include induction training for all visitors and third parties.
Y Understanding risks and how to mitigate them are key to training.
Y Training and information of authorities is the basis for building credibility.
Principle 17
Emergency and spill response plans:
Y Good, regular emergency and spill response planning and emergency response simulations,
including the neighboring industries and the authorities, contribute to the safe use of AFR.
39
27.06.2006 10:18:44 Uhr
6.4.2 The cornerstones of an occupational health & safety (OH&S) system.
Y initial facility design or modification
OH & S is of primary importance in co-processing. OH&S
Y process modification
is based on thorough information, efficient risk assessY determination of criteria for acceptance – banned
ment, and complete implementation of all preventive
measures. A technical measure is always preferred over
materials due to OH & S or process reasons
Y determination of what constitutes hazardous work
a personal preventive measure. Information about decisions on OH & S must be available to employees and
activities and where work permits will be required
Y development of a site-specific industrial hygiene proother concerned stakeholders. The risk and crisis management are the main pillars of OH & S. This goes along
gram, ensuring no adverse impacts to workers or
with risk assessment, design safety and quality manthose exposed to AFR
Y determination of when and where personal protecagement system.
tive equipment will be necessary as determined by
Risk assessment/risk management: There is no such
personal exposure measurements, environmental
thing as zero risk, but risks can be properly managed. Risk
concentrations, and mandated occupational expoassessment is the examination of the probability and
sure limits (OELs)
Y development of an emergency response plan for the
magnitude/impact of an event that could occur. Risk
assessments must be performed by commercial staff,
pre-processing or co-processing facilities (the site
waste transporters/handlers, the pre-processing facilimanagement must ensure that adequate emergency
ties, the cement plant and engineers involved in the
procedures are in place and communicated to emdesign and selection of AFR handling and storage equipployees, authorities, and neighboring industries)
Y review of critical equipment and safety equipment
ment. Risk assessment must be carried out during:
(development of a preventive checks system).
Management Processes
Strategic Planning / Q-Management / Amelioration / Risk-Management
Business Processes
Pre-Processing:
Waste Sourcing > Transportation > Reception > AFR-Production
Client
Client
Co-Processing:
AFR-Storage
>
Clinker Produktion
>
Monitoring
Supporting Processes
Human Resources / OH&S / Environment / Maintenance
Crisis Management / Finances / Communication
Figure 7: Integration of risk and crisis management in a quality management system.
40
27.06.2006 10:18:44 Uhr
Data obtained from risk assessments can be used
by the pre-processing or co-processing facility to prioritize which items must be immediately addressed or put
into the subsequent years‘ budgetary process. Communications of identified risks and mitigation means are
required for all stakeholders, including authorities.
Design safety: Design safety is one of the easiest, yet
often most overlooked, aspects of ensuring OH & S. Risk
assessments are part of the process for design safety:
Y the site with all buildings must fulfill legal compliances (correspond with the regulations of authorities)
Y suitability of the site; chose the least vulnerable location based upon possible scenarios using available
information on predicted waste types, usage, volumes, rates and proximity to populations of concern;
aspects of site security must be considered
Y layout of the site should be scaled and designed for
the anticipated activity to be carried out, including
enough space for installation of increased production
capacity and storage
Y well-maintained equipment for processing and handling of alternative fuels and raw materials must be
used when possible to decrease the danger to personal safety or property
Y storage areas for alternative fuels and secondary raw
materials should be designed to avoid or minimize
health and safety risk to employees and surrounding
communities
Y engineering designs must comply with international
Guidelines or codes and legal requirements (Seveso II,
ATEX, RMP, NFPC, VDI etc.).
Management systems: Having an OH&S management system is essential during the operational phase
of sites handling, processing, or using AFR. The basis of
the management system is to:
Y strive for continual improvement in OH & S performance (i.e.18001, CEFIC, Responsible Care etc.)
Y audit system and review (plan, do, check, act); management review, internal audits, external audits (such
as OSHA VPP Five Star), systems for OH & S
Y have in place documentation (i.e. data sheets or similar documents, hazardous work permits, training
records, equipment inspection and maintenance
records, operational permits, audit results, environmental and medical monitoring results, and industrial hygiene results) and task descriptions linked to
necessary OH & S considerations including personal
protective equipment etc.
Y create mandatory hazard communication: how to indicate existing or potential hazards, i.e. personal protective equipment (PPE) mapping or zones
Y create stakeholder communications, i.e. employees,
sub-contractors, community, NGOs, authorities and
other concerned parties
Y train in OH & S: job or task specific including OH&S
considerations (including inspection and testing of
all safety equipment regularly) for all workers who
might be exposed to AFR
Y introduction of an OH&S officer post.
Hazardous operations (exceeding design operational limits) or design consequence analysis (for example: if water lines to fire protection systems have no
pressure, what is your default or backup solution?) can
help in the determination of safety measures such as
layers of protection (blast doors, reinforced walls, parallel water lines etc) for critical processes or equipment.
41
27.06.2006 10:18:45 Uhr
6.4.3 Organization for safety and security
General requirements: some general requirements
must be followed so that an organization for safety and
security is functional and has enough weight in the
management board:
Y The organization for safety and security is located directly under the management board
Y A risk manager, nominated by the board, leads this
organization; the risk manager should be a member
of management
Y The different safety and security departments are
headed by safety or security officers; the tasks of the
safety officer must not be a full time job, and the work
load depends on the plant size; it is common that a
safety officer has additional OH&S tasks in the site.
Emergency intervention group: Having an emergency
intervention group is essential to take first measures
against an emergency impact:
Y each site must organize an emergency intervention
group, equipped and instructed (fire brigade, organization against oil and chemical impacts)
Y the quantity, the tasks and the equipment depends
on the size of the site, the risks on the area of the site
and the distance to the next public intervention
originations (police, fire brigade, chemical intervention group, medical corps).
These units must be trained regularly, including by
means of live exercises and drills, also involving if possible the response units of the public sector organizations mentioned above (police etc.). This is also true for
spill response teams (see below).
Guide Note Safety and Security Policy
Crisis Management
Management Board
· interruption of work
· accident
· fire
· blackmail · strike
Risk Manager Member of Direction
OH&S Officer
Fire Officer
Enviroment Officer
IT-Security Officer
Assurance Officer
Officer for special tasks
Figure 8: Example of an organizational safety and security set-up
42
27.06.2006 10:18:45 Uhr
6.4.4 Spill response plan
Each site shall develop, implement and communicate a
detailed spill response plan to ensure effective and
rapid containment and clean-up in the event of a spill.
The spill response plan shall:
Y review and describe areas of potential spills
Y include written work instructions and procedures to
be used in the event of a spill
Y assign responsibilities to plant operators and provide
them with appropriate training
Y provide training and protective equipment for all
plant employees (including sub-contractors) in spill
prevention, spill detection, and immediate spill response procedures
Y define clean-up procedures and provide necessary
resources in accordance with the characteristics of
the materials
Y describe
reporting and communication requirements
and measures.
6.4.5 Emergency response plans
The site management must ensure that adequate emergency response procedures are in place and communicated to all plant employees, responsible authorities
and other relevant stakeholders, such as communities.
Emergency response plans mean contingency planning, i.e. what can be done by site staff and sub-contractors, when to alert neighboring industries for help,
when to alert community emergency response, etc.
Everyone working on or visiting the site must understand the site layout, potential hazards and emergency
response plans.
6.5 Communication and Social Responsibility
6.5.1 Principles and requirements
Principle 18
Openness and transparency:
Y Provide all necessary information to allow stakeholders to understand the purpose of coprocessing, the context, the function of parties involved and decision-making procedures.
Y Open discussions about good and bad experiences / practices are part of transparency.
Principle 19
Credibility and consistency:
Y Build credibility by being open, honest and consistent. Rhetoric must be matched with
demonstrated facts and good performance. Gaps between what you say and what you
currently do must be avoided.
Principle 20
Cultivating a spirit of open dialogue, based on mutual respect and trust:
Y Communication also means seeking feedback and dialogue with stakeholders and integrating
external views. Participants in stakeholder engagement activities must be able to express
their views without fear of restriction or discipline.
Principle 21
Cultural sensitivity:
Y Take into account the different cultural environments in which we operate.
Be target-oriented and truthful.
Principle 22
Continuity:
Y Start early; and once you start, never stop.
43
27.06.2006 10:18:46 Uhr
6.5.2 The importance of communication
Communication and stakeholder engagement are success factors in the co-processing of waste in cement
production. Some stakeholders are pleased by the “winwin” possibilities of using waste and by-products as
fuels in cement kilns, while others are concerned about
potential health or environmental impacts from the
handling and incineration of alternative fuels. The cement industry can be a valuable and respected partner
for communities in infrastructure improvements, emergency cases or social developments. This opportunity
and these advantages must be communicated in an
open and unselfish manner.
Guidelines, policies and regulations address these
concerns on an operational and scientific level, but communication plays a crucial role in public perception.
Situation analysis: The identification of perceptions, expectations and needs provides the basis for all communications activities. Surveys, interviews and analysis of
media coverage are the instruments to be used to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
The assessment may also provide information on any
concerns of stakeholders. A situation analysis also helps
to assess the needs of the community where a cement
plant operates and to identify potential projects in the
community. Y Annex 19 provides a step-by-step approach
to carrying out a situation analysis.
Communication objectives: They need to be adapted
to the local and/or national circumstances. Examples
include:
Plant level
[ Y see Case Study 9: Erika waste recovery – The example
of Holcim support for oil tanker spill clean-up, France ]
Y
Y
6.5.3 A systemic approach to communications
Communication must be done in a systemic way. This
means that a process must be initiated and all the relevant stakeholders and their needs and interests be
taken into account to create a shared vision.
To be effective, communication should be planned
as early as possible. The standard communications
cycle consists of:
a. assessment of the situation
b. definition of the communication objectives
c. assignment of roles and responsibilities
d. identification of stakeholders and their
communication needs
e. development of topics and messages
f. implementation of tools and activities
g. evaluation of the communication activities
and review of the communication cycle.
The following explanations provide guidance
on how to plan and conduct your communications
activities.
44
ensure support of your employees
earn the trust of neighbors and relevant stakeholders
such as local NGOs and local authorities, and obtain
or maintain the „license to operate“.
National level
promote understanding of co-processing in the ce
ment industry and raise awareness of its benefits
Y raise awareness of the importance of disposing of
hazardous wastes in a controlled, environmentally
sound manner
Y draw policy-makers’ attention to the subject of hazardous waste management
Y support the development and enforcement of an appropriate regulatory framework
Y promote acceptance and support for internationally
endorsed Guidelines for the co-processing of waste in
the cement industry.
Y
Roles and responsibilities: It is important to clearly
assign roles and responsibilities for communications.
For example, it must be clear who will be responsible for
the coordination of communications, media relations,
relations with authorities and crisis management.
27.06.2006 10:18:46 Uhr
Levels
Key stakeholders
Engagement activities
Local
Employees, community, authorities,
local NGOs
Communication and community advisory panels
National
National governments, NGOs, customers
Communication, lobbying, stakeholder
dialogues, memberships12 and partnerships
Regional
EU, regional offices of international
organizations
Advocacy activities
International
International government organizations
(UN bodies), international NGOs, WBCSD
Communication, stakeholder dialogues, memberships and corporate partnerships
Table 6: Stakeholder classification according to different levels
Stakeholders and their communication needs: Stakeholders are people, groups, or institutions that are
affected, might be affected, or might feel affected by the
co-processing of waste or related activities. They have an
interest in the company and its performance and can
influence its activities. Stakeholders to be considered
include employees, communities around cement operations and waste pre-processing facilities, authorities at
different levels, NGOs, customers, suppliers, businesses
and business associations, and journalists.
The communications needs of the different stakeholders vary from one group to the other. The situation
analysis helps to identify these needs and the appropriate opinion leaders (people, groups, or organizations,
depending on the cultural context).
Topics and messages: Topics and key messages can be
extracted from these Guidelines. They must be developed for internal and external stakeholders. They should
be adapted to specific needs based on the information
gathered in the previous steps. Developing fact sheets
on key issues and assembling a list of anticipated or
frequently asked questions (FAQ) provides a basis for
communications with all types of stakeholders.
Engaging with stakeholders helps to prioritize issues, reduce conflicts, and to forge alliances and shared
principles. Joint ownership of difficult decisions can be
another important result of stakeholder engagement
activities. In return, companies must be willing to provide time and resources and commit to increased
transparency.
An early start with general sustainable development messages will give you a solid foundation on
which to develop specific communications activities
and help create a trouble-free introduction of coprocessing.
Tools: As stakeholder involvement is fundamental
to maintaining a license to operate, tools for interactively engaging with stakeholders to manage and integrate their expectations are of particular importance.
12 For example, membership in an industry association or environmental organization
45
27.06.2006 10:18:47 Uhr
Communications and engagement tools should
be chosen by anticipating how the targeted stakeholders can be reached most effectively.
Evaluation: Periodic evaluation of communications and
stakeholder engagement activities provides information on their effectiveness. The evaluation can be conducted by media coverage, feedback from the community advisory panels or surveys. Based on the results of
the evaluation, topics, messages, and tools are adapted
to changing circumstances or to improve the effectiveness of communication.
Information sharing
Concluding remarks: The above Guidelines provide a
basic framework for communications activities. For specific topics such as media relations, stakeholder relations, or crisis communications, each organization needs
to implement appropriate procedures and trainings
adapted to existing organizational structures and available resources. If necessary, seek support and advice
from specialized agencies or partner organizations.
[ Y see Case Study 10: Community Advisory Panel: The
example of Energis in Albox, Andalusia ]
Participation/consultation
and coordination
Collaboration and
partnerships
Y Newsletter
Y Bulletin
Internal
(print, e-mail)
board
Y Intranet
Y Meetings
Y Internal
Y Conference
briefing documents
Y Standard presentations
Y FAQ fact sheets
Y Websites
Y Case studies
calls
Y Workshops
Y Training
Y Meetings
Y Conferences
Y Stakeholder
Y Internet
Y Reports,
External
various types of
publications, brochures
Y Advertising and sponsoring
Y Press information (media
release, press conference)
Y Fact sheets
Y Standard presentations
Y FAQs
Y Case studies
dialogues
(open days, site visits)
Y Focus groups: research tool of
small group discussions, generally
on specific topic/ project
Y Community advisory panels - a key
for the co-processing of waste: regular ongoing meetings with crosssection of stakeholder interests on
diverse topics/ issues
Y Community involvement: Addressing real needs and contributing to
the development of host communities. Being a good neighbor entails working with stakeholders to
help improve their quality of life.
Y Events
Y Partnership
projects:
pooling resources (e.g.
business, community,
NGOs, government) to
achieve a common social
or environmental goal.
Table 7: Categorization and overview of communication and stakeholder engagement tools
46
27.06.2006 10:18:47 Uhr
27.06.2006 10:18:48 Uhr
Index of Case Studies
Case Study 01
Selection of adequate feed points - The example of Lägerdorf, Holcim Germany
i
Case Study 02
An integrated waste management concept – The example from Cartago, Costa Rica
iii
Case Study 03
Pre-processing of waste material - The example of Energis, Holcim Group, in Albox, Spain
v
Case Study 04
Aspects of permitting – The example from North Rhine Westfalia, Germany
vii
Case Study 05
Emissions Monitoring and Reporting (EMR) - The experiences at Holcim
ix
Case Study 06
Pre-processing of waste material – The example of Ecoltec, Mexico
xi
Case Study 07
Test Burns with PCDDs/PCDFs monitoring - The Philippines examples
xiii
Case Study 08
AFR quality control laboratory - The example of Resotec, Brasil
xv
Case Study 09
Erika waste recovery – The example of Holcim support for oil tanker spill clean-up, France
xvii
Case Study 10
Community advisory panel: The example of Energis in Albox, Spain
xix
27.06.2006 10:18:48 Uhr
Case Study
Co-processing Waste Materials
in Cement Production
Selection of Adequate Feed Points
The Example of Lägerdorf, Holcim Germany
Background
In the 1980’s and early 1990’s co-processing of
waste in cement plants was not common in
Germany. As one of the first plants, Holcim Germany’s Lägerdorf plant started with waste oil
and selected industrial waste such as diatomaceous earth and paper sludges. In 2004, the plant
was co-processing a total volume of 118,000 t of
alternative fuels, and 228,000 t of alternative raw
materials.
Process
The Lägerdorf plant was originally equipped with
two grate preheater (“Lepol”) kilns. As from 1995,
kiln No.11 was put into operation. This is an SP kiln
with precalciner and flash dryer for the raw material that is prepared in a wet process. This kiln
was especially designed for the use of AFR. A
large variety of AFR with completely different
material characteristics requires different feed
points to be selected in the kiln system (see figure below). In Lägerdorf, examples for all types of
feed points can be found.
Feed Point Selection
Sludges from the treatment of drinking water
are even less polluted than the virgin raw material. Hence they can be fed without further testing, together with the natural raw materials. Fly
ash from coal-fired power plants contain residues of unburned carbon and traces of mercury.
In this case a compre-hensive emission assessment (including an “expulsion test” by HGRS)
was carried out. It showed that feeding via the
flash dryer does not cause any additional emissions, neither of organic nor of metallic origin.
This was confirmed by several measurements of
the stack emissions.
All other AFRs are fed directly to the “hot”
part of the process where organic components
would not just evaporate but be burnt completely.
Examples: Organic distillation residues from
the chemical industry are considered “hazardous
wastes” due to their chemical characteristics. In
the calciner they are completely burned with full
recovery of their considerable calorific value.
Animal meal – a “high risk material” that is a
perfect substitute for brown coal due to its similar calorific value and burning behavior – is also
fed to the precalciner firing, the same as fuller´s
earth – a soil-type residue from the food and lubrication oil industry.
The treatment of salt slags – a residue from
the aluminum smelting process – provides a fine
grained aluminum oxide very similar to natural
clay. It is fed into the calciner as an alternative
raw material where its ammonia content even
contributes to the reduction of NOx from the
main flame.
Other alternative fuels such as waste oil,
solvents or “fluff” – the combustible fraction of
sorted municipal waste – are fed directly to the
main burner of the kiln system.
Guidelines on co-pocessing Waste Materials in Cement Production
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:i
i
27.06.2006 10:18:48 Uhr
Slurry storage tanks
Storage and dosing of waste
Good Practice
Prior to co-processing AFR, all candidate wastes
are subject to a sophisticated preassessment
procedure, consisting of:
a pre-screening step to check compliance with
internal and external requirements
Y a process check to ensure compatibility with
the cement kiln operations
Y a plant trial with a limited quantity of waste.
Y
nated feed stuff. The incineration of confiscated
cigarettes, drugs, counterfeit money or even outdated banknotes has been requested in the past.
These projects are typically not attractive in most
cases due to the very demanding control measures, and were finally accomplished by commercial waste incinerators available in the region.
Lessons learnt
All necessary measures must be taken to
protect health and safety of workers and nearby
residents.
Further Development
Recently the series of alternative fuels and raw
materials was extended by fluffy foil and paper
from municipal and commercial waste, and by
shredded roof felt.
Occasionally services are rendered at the
request of authorities, for example the co-processing of animal meal, or rotten or contami-
An early decision to build up a pre-processing
platform would have been acceptable from today’s point of view. As the situation was less favorable for such a decision then, the intensive cooperation with an external platform was the best
compromise and is still well maintained. However, waste streams and waste handling can be
controlled more easily and more efficiently in a
wholly owned pre-processing plant.
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
www. holcim.com/de
AFR Feeding Points
1 - Sludges from water processing
2 - Flyash
1
Water
3 - Main AFR Input
Slurry Preparation
4 - AF via Main Burner
Preheater
Raw Materials
Raw Materials
2
Filitration
Filter Cake
Additives
Dryer
Tertiary Air
3
Fuels, Raw
Materials
4
Calciner
Kiln
Cooler
Cooler Air
Offgas
Clinker
Cement
Mill
Cement
Filter
Cement Kiln Dust
Solids
ii
Gas
Water
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:ii
27.06.2006 10:18:49 Uhr
Integrated Waste Management Concept
The Example from Cartago, Costa Rica
Background
In Costa Rica the industry is responsible for its
own waste management and the common
waste disposal method is landfilling. The given
infrastructure is suitable for the disposal of municipal waste but not designed for hazardous
wastes. Industrial waste is collected from private
companies and co-disposed at landfill sites designed for municipal waste. At present the only
possible way to dispose of hazardous waste in
an environmental sound manner would be the
export to an industrialized country for final
treatment.
Process
To improve the waste management system in
the district of Cartago, an integrated waste
management concept has been elaborated with
a clear distribution of responsibilities between
the public (responsible for municipal waste) and
the private sector (in charge of industrial waste).
For both waste streams, programs for waste reduction (cleaner production), recycling and
sound disposal have been initiated. In this context co-processing has been selected as a recovery and treatment technology first of all for industrial waste but was also considered as a solution for those leftovers from municipal waste
which can’t be recycled anymore or are unsuitable for the disposal at a sanitary landfill.
In 2004 Holcim Costa Rica S.A. put a new
state-of-the-art cement kiln into operation with
auxiliary monitoring and filtering equipment.
The facility fulfils the requirements for co-processing waste material. The permit issued by the
concerned authority allows for co-processing of
four types of waste:
Y Used solvents (halogen free)
Y waste oil
Y waste tires and rubber scrap
Y plastics (except PVC).
Those waste materials are either obtained directly from the waste producing industry or from
the public sector. Some waste categories, like
used tires or pesticide containers, are collected
through environmental and health programs.
Such actions have been initiated by voluntary
groups in cooperation with the public sector as
randomly disposed waste tires provide an ideal
breeding area for dengue transmitting mosquitoes. The illegal and unsound disposal of used
pesticide containers causes harmful environmental impacts.
Legal Framework
Before 2004 co-processing of waste material in
cement kilns was not regulated by national legislation. Holcim Costa Rica S.A. proved with test
burns the ability of an environmentally sound
handling and disposal of waste material in the
new cement kiln. In a joint effort between the
cement manufacturers and the Ministry of
Health, a regulation was implemented that permits the co-processing of the above mentioned
waste materials.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:iii
iii
27.06.2006 10:18:50 Uhr
Future co-processing potential: PBCs from transformers
Collected waste tires
Good Practice
Co-processing at Holcim Costa Rica SA involves
high-quality work throughout the supply chain.
Controlling and monitoring mechanisms minimize the risk for the emission of toxic substances
from the waste treatment activity. Wherever
possible, waste products are obtained directly
from the generating industry in order to assure a
good traceability of waste. The offered services
by Holcim are regulated by individual contracts,
depending on the waste material and the required transportation. The waste oil is collected
from the garages by some major lubricant manufacturers within their sales activities, and then
delivered to Holcim.
Further Development
The existing national regulation restricts the use
The existing national regulation restricts the use
of the cement kiln to the co-processing of waste
material with a significant calorific value only.
But there is an urgent need to implement also
solutions for the treatment of other hazardous
wastes, including obsolete pesticides.
GTZ and Holcim Costa Rica S.A., in cooperation with other stakeholders from the public and
private sector started to contribute in a joint
effort to the elaboration of a new waste law that
would introduce mechanisms to minimize the
waste streams, and to optimize the re-use of
waste material before final disposal is applied. In
the new legislation co-processing will be considered as a technical option for the recovery of
material and energy.
iv
Other joint activities launched are the classification and quantification of wastes which are generated country wide and to estimate the
future potential for co-processing. In order to respond to the new situation Holcim Costa Rica S.A
applied for an increase in the number of types of
waste to be permitted for co- processing.
Lessons Learnt.
Co-processing was seen as waste incineration with
In the past, co-processing was seen as waste incineration with harmful impacts on health and the
environment.
With the communication policy of Holcim
S.A. Costa Rica and activities to promote co-processing in the country (e.g. participation on the national program to combat dengue fever) co-processing
is now recognized as a valuable waste treatment
alternative. A close and professional cooperation
between the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of
Environment, the local government of Cartago
allowed for the integration of co-processing into a
regional waste management concept. This ensured
a quick start-up of local co-processing activities
and it is expected that – over the long term– coprocessing will be incorporated into the national
waste strategy and will be applied in many more
regions of the country.
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:iv
27.06.2006 10:18:51 Uhr
Case Study
Pre-processing of Waste Material
The Example of Energis, Holcim Group, in Albox, Spain
Background
Energis was created in 1997 as a subsidiary of
Holcim Spain. The purpose of the company is to
add value to Holcim Spain’s cement operations by
providing waste management solutions to industry and communities through co-processing of
waste in Holcim cement kilns. To directly access
the waste market, Energis established the pretreatment plant at Albox in 2003. The plant,
located in southeastern Spain, transforms a wide
range of solid, pasty, and liquid wastes into impregnated sawdust and liquid substitution fuels.
Process
Albox has two main production lines: (1) a shredding and mixing line in which solid and pasty
waste is mixed with sawdust to produce impregnated sawdust and solid substitute fuel (CSS),
and (2) a liquid storage and blending line for liquid substitution fuel (CSL). The lines are designed
to produce 60,000 tons of CSS and 20,000 tons
of CSL per year.
In July 2005 Spain introduced a law banning
organic waste in landfills. This gives Albox more
opportunities to find organic waste on the market.
Waste Delivery
About 90% of Albox’s waste is delivered in
drums, 10% is transported in bulk by tanker or
container truck, and a small amount is delivered
in large bags.
Y Source
materials for Solid Substitute Fuel (SSF)
include contaminated earth and sand; resin;
paint; distillation residues; sludges of ink, glue,
varnish, and oil; mastic; filter cake; grease; soap;
used catalyzers; and alumina sludge, etc.
Y Source materials for Liquid Substitute Fuel (LSF)
include waste oil, polluted water, and halogenated and non-halogenated solvents, etc.
Quality Assurance
Albox accepts waste from authorized producers
or collectors only. To become authorized, the
waste producer must submit a sample for analysis in Albox’s on-site laboratory, and permit Energis representatives to visit the producer and collect information about its manufacturing process. If the producer and the waste meet Albox’s
requirements, Albox issues a certificate. To prevent contamination, each delivery undergoes
rigorous quality control.
Good Practice
Albox does not treat wastes such as pressed drums
and metal separator residues, which are sent to a
foundry for recycling. Pallets are taken back by the
sawdust supplier, non-polluted scrap metal is sold
to a local scrap dealer, and waste that cannot be
processed – such as drums that cannot be shredded – is sent to a third party for treatment. Thanks
to preliminary testing, a strong external communications policy, detailed analysis and a strict refusal
policy, the percentage of refused waste is low.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:v
v
27.06.2006 10:18:51 Uhr
Energis director of quality, Isidora Diaz (left) together with Martin Berbel Granados (right) in front of the pre-processing-plant.
Sawdust
Half of the sawdust used in CSS production must
be fresh, and substitutes may be mixed with the
sawdust. The main impregnation substitute
material is compressed cellulose. Moisture content varies significantly among deliveries and suppliers, and greatly affects the impregnation capability of sawdust. This in turn affects the percentage of sawdust required for CSS production.
Further Development
The plant’s success ensures a sustainable flow of
AFR to Holcim Spain, offers an innovative and
practical solution to waste producers and, above
all, benefits the cement industry as a whole.
Belgium is transported in bulk, whereas 90% of
the waste in Spain is transported in drums. Each
drum must be sampled as part of the quality assurance program, and properly handled and
stored, which increases operational costs.
The plant faced the problem of shredder
fires caused by friction between the drums, their
contents and the machinery during shredding. To
reduce this risk, Albox used nitrogen during the
shredding operation, which increased the overall
pre-processing costs. Over the past two years, Albox has got these problems under control. It has
improved its sourcing of critical spare parts, and
developed a special course to teach workers how
to prevent shredder fires
Lessons Learnt
The design of Albox is similar to an earlier plant in
Belgium: Scoribel. Albox profited from the many
lessons learned at Scoribel. But market conditions
in Spain and Belgium differ: 90% of the waste in
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
Scheme Alternative Fuel production
vi
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:vi
27.06.2006 10:18:52 Uhr
Case Study
Aspects of Permitting
The Example of North Rhine Westfalia, Germany
Background
Application Documents
In Germany, cement kilns are subject to authorization; their operation is governed by the requirements of the Federal Emission Control Act.
This act protects against harmful effects such as
air pollution and similar problems. It forms the
basis of nationwide, comprehensive laws on air
quality, noise abatement and plant safety. The
emission limits in exhaust gas from cement
plants are regulated by the Technical Instructions
on Air Quality Control, and if waste fuels are
used, by the Ordinance on Incineration Plants
Burning Waste and Similar Substances. This ordinance is based on the EU Directive 2000/76/EC.
Y Topographical
map
documents
Y Diagrammatic section of the plant,
Machine site plan
Y Exposition of the plant, of the operation
terms of normal working conditions
Y Description of the emission situation and prevention of pollution
Y Secondary fuels: generation, processing, quality
assurance system, utilizing installation, supply
Y Air pollution emission prognosis (NO , SO , Dix
2
oxins/ Furans (PCDD/F), dust, heavy metals),
Y health and safety standards
Y energy saving measures
Y paper for public information.
Y Constructions
Permit Conditions
The key environmental issues associated with
cement production in the licensing procedure
are air pollution and the efficient use of energy.
The application for a license must give comprehensive specifications for the operating requirements for the cement kiln to ensure safe
combustion of the residues, together with a
description of the necessary operational measures. The basic principle that is always applied to
carcinogens as a requirement for issuing a license states that emissions are to be restricted
as far as possible. In addition to maintaining low
mass concentrations, it is also important to minimize the mass flows.
Waste Information
A key parameter is the quality of the substituted
fossil fuel. A small difference in the burden of
pollutants between conventional fuel and waste
fuel can arise. Co-processing might still be accepted by authorities who need to balance the
advantages of minimizing environmental impacts of waste and fuel consumption against the
impact of small increases in pollutants. To compare scenarios between “with and without waste
fuel” it is advisable to define an average content
of heavy metals in fossil fuels for benchmarking.
It can be used for direct comparison of different
types of waste fuel qualities or even serve as the
basis for the development of a material specific
standard. The standard could be defined as an
average content of heavy metals and maximum
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:vii
vii
27.06.2006 10:18:54 Uhr
Pollutant
C
Total dust
30
HCI
10
HF
1
NOx
5001/8002
Cd + TI
0.05
Hg
0.05
Sb, As, Pb, Cr, Co, Cu, Mn,Ni, V
Dioxins and Furans
0.5
SO2
503
TOC
103
0.1
Daily average 10% O2, dry all values in mg/m3 dioxins and furnans in ng/m3
1) new plants
2) existing plants
3) exceptions may be authorized by the competent authority in cases where
SO2 and TOC do not result from the incineration of waste
Continous monitoring of emissions and
operating conditions:
Y Total Dust
Y Hg
Y O2 volume concentration
Y NOX
Y TOC
Y CO
Y SO2
Y exhaust volume (Nm3/h)
Y exhaust gas temperature
Y material feed kiln inlet.
Directive 2000/76/EC incineration of waste
content in the high calorific waste fuel. The level
of calorific value in waste fuel from manufacturing processes is 20 ± 2 MJ/kg, while the calorific
value content for the high calorific part of municipal waste is fixed at 16 MJ/kg.
Y regulations
of primary energy have to follow in
reliance on secondary fuel data
Y waste fuels may only be supplied during normal continuous operation.
Energy Aspects
Monitoring Emissions
The use of various secondary fuels is always accompanied by extensive emissions measurements. A distinction is made between continuous and individual measurement. Another is made
between first time- and repeat measurements,
measurement for special reasons, calibrations and
function tests. The measurement-relevant parameters to be considered in measurement planning
derive from regulatory requirements, e.g. the operating permit, information from the technical supervisory body responsible for the plant and from
on-site inspection.
Monitoring Combustion
Y The
burning process has to be monitored continuously using modern process technology
Y constantly fixed inspections on arrival of waste
materials
Y Liquid media are sampled continuously
through trickle tubes for quality control
Y the main parameters of the waste materia
must be put into the process control system on
a continuous basis
The production of clinker is energy-intensive. Theoretically an average of 1.75 MJ of thermal energy
is needed to burn 1kg clinker. The actual requirement for thermal energy in modern plants is
approximately 2.9 to 3.2 MJ/kg (BREF 2001) depending on the process, up to 4 MJ/kg. Most installations use the dry process, which is the most
economical in terms of energy consumption. In
practice, fuels with an average net calorific value
of at least hu,m 20 – 25 MJ/kg are normally used in
a main firing system.
Stack with monitoring platform
Lessons Learnt
Past experiences have shown that the cement
industry can play an important part in the use of
secondary fuels. Key factors include favorable
conditions inside rotary tube kilns, optimized
process and safety technology, improved exhaust
gas cleaning systems and a comprehensive control of the input substances.
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
www.bezreg-muenster.nrw.de
Components (mg/m3)
Emissions
(daily average values)
Emission limits in permits in
Germany (daily average values)
Dust
1-15
14-20
HCI
0,3-5
10
HF
0,1-2,0
1
SO2
100-400
350
NOx
300-500 (600)
500
Hg
0,005-0,03
0,03-0,05
Cd + TI,
< 0,001
0,05
< 0,002
0,05
PCDD+PCDF (TE) [ng/m3]
0,001 - 0,01
0,05-0,1
viii
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:viii
27.06.2006 10:18:55 Uhr
Case Study
Emissions Monitoring
and Reporting (EMR)
The Experiences at Holcim
Background
The Holcim company is one of the leading producers of cement worldwide. Cement production
requires considerable amounts of fossil energy to
fire the kilns.
According to its environmental policy,
Holcim strives to conserve non-renewable resources such as raw materials and fossil fuels.
Relative to cement production, this means
use of waste-derived raw materials and fuels.
Holcim has started this approach in the early
1980s and today has the highest alternative fuel
rate of all cement producers. It has acquired leading edge know-how in alternative fuels preparation (pre-processing) and co-processing.
In many industrialized countries alternative
fuel schemes (including other industries besides
cement) contribute importantly to resource conservation. They also contribute considerably to
national waste management schemes. Since the
cement industry is one of the early industries
developing in a national economy, it can thus
play an important role in the development of upto-date national waste management schemes.
Unfortunately, many stake-holders still perceive waste management and cement production as a combination of two evils, combining
perceptions of first generation garbage incinerators with the dusty cement plants of the past.
This perception is no longer valid today. Waste
incinerators are built as waste-to-energy plants
and include sophisticated exhaust gas cleaning
equipment. Cement plants are built as modern
cyclone preheater/precalciner plants with efficient dust suppression features and exhaust gas
and air de-dusting equipment. Also, and in contrast to most other industries, cement plant
main stack emissions (with the exception of
NO2) are not from the fuels, but from thermally
volatilizable components of the raw materials,
expelled (roasted off) during the heating process
of these materials.
Emissions from modern cement plants are
largely produced by thermally volatilizable components in raw materials. With regard to combustion gases from main and precalciner firing,
the process-inherent cyclone-type raw meal preheater as well as the raw mill system act as alkaline dry scrubbers. Therefore, cement kiln emissions do not change in the function of the fuel
mix, even if it includes waste-derived materials
and, of course, if some expertise is used.
To prove this and to demonstrate the stable
quality of cement kiln exhaust gases, but also to
know the emissions from its plants, Holcim decided to develop and to implement the Holcim
EMR program from 2004 in all its cement plants.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:ix
ix
27.06.2006 10:18:56 Uhr
A measuring team working on a main stack in South Africa
Holcim’s EMR Program
Best practice/lessons learned
Basically it was decided that the program would
include the relevant emission components defined in the EU Waste Incineration Directive
(EU 76/2000/EC).
The continuous emission monitoring (CEM)
equipment has reached a high technical level of
accuracy and reliability. In order to achieve this
standard, permanent availability of the equipment (exceeding 90%) must be ensured. This requires systematic maintenance work and, most
importantly, the availability of appropriate fuels,
spare parts and trained personnel both at the
supplier and the cement plant end.
The components – dust, SO2, NOx, VOC, often also NH3 and HCl, as well as O2 and H2O (for
data evaluation purposes) – are measured continuously with most
up-to-date equipment
from three selected
main suppliers.
Continuous emission monitoring equipment in place
The components
NH3 , HCl, benzene,
PCDD/ DF and 12 heavy
metals are measured at
least once a year by acknowledged (whenever
possible) measuring institutes (test houses).
The quality of the continuous measurements is assured by the cooperation of the Holcim companies with the main equipment suppliers in the sectors of maintenance and personnel
training.
Holcim’s central technical services support
the program by constantly updated documentation (EMR manual and 13 Guidelines) as well as
by ongoing consultancy for the Group plants.
Once a year the respective spot data and
yearly averages from the continuous measurements are reported to corporate level in a standardized way by means of the Plant Environmental Profile (PEP) questionnaire.
x
With regard to the once a year measurements, the recommendation has been to select a
performance test house and then to stick to it,
profiting from the test house’s progress on the
learning curve for even more reliable data.
Measuring head with plane filter for
low dust emission rates
Further development
At the end of 2005, 90% of the Holcim stacks
earmarked for EMR, had been equipped with respective equipment and 90% also supplied, in
most cases, complete and reasonable, data from
spot measurements.
New production lines will incorporate the
entire EMR infrastructure including e.g. a well
designed measuring platform on the main stack
from the very beginning. Newly acquired plants
are given three to four years to live up to Holcim’s
EMR program.
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:x
27.06.2006 10:18:56 Uhr
Case Study
Pre-processing of Waste Material
The Example of Ecoltec, Mexico
Background
Quality Control
Wastes come in different forms and qualities.
The transformation of waste into Alternative Fuels and Raw materials (AFR) must meet certain
requirements. Some types of waste cannot be
used directly as AFR. A single waste stream, in the
form of a liquid or solid substitute fuel, therefore
needs to be created. This step produces an AFR
that complies with the technical specifications
of cement production, and which guarantees
that environmental standards are met.
Quality control is an essential part of pre-processing activities. First, clinker production requires
that the used AFR fulfils certain requirements
concerning calorific value, ph-value, humidity,
chlorine and sulfur content. Second, accumulation
of pollutants in the cement and excessive air
emissions must be avoided. Quality control takes
place in the internal laboratory, where test samples of incoming waste and of AFR are held ready
to be fed into the cement kiln. The test samples
and records of the results of the analysis are
stored for security and reference purposes. The
results are are reported to the authorities on a
regular basis.
Process
Ecoltec has facilities that process all types of
waste. Agreements with the customers regulate
the packaging and the collection/delivery conditions of waste materials. Transport is done in
tanks or barrels or as bulk material by an external company.
Liquid waste (e.g. waste oil, solvents, etc.) is
mixed and stored in tanks before being fed into
the cement kiln. Solid waste (e.g. plastic packaging, chipped tires, waste textiles etc.) and sludgy
waste (e.g. paint residues, distillation sludges, oil
sludge, etc.) are mixed with clean sawdust and
then shredded. During the sieving process, the
fine, solid mix is separated fromthe coarse mix
and then forwarded via conveyer belt to the storage building. The AFR is now ready to be transported by truck to the cement plant.
Good Practice
The pre-processing activities are organized by
Holcim Apasco’s pre-processing subsidiary,
Ecoltec. It offers complete waste disposal solutions to customers, independent of whether the
waste is suitable for co-processing or not. Waste
not suitable for co-processing is forwarded to
companies with adequate treatment facilities.
For the transport of certain wastes, plastic or steel
barrels are used. The plastic barrels are shredded
and used as AFR. The steel barrels are forwarded
for recycling once waste is removed. The barrels
are squeezed flat with a special machine before
recycling.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xi
xi
27.06.2006 10:18:57 Uhr
Impregnated sawdust
Further Development
The mixing process of sludgy waste with solid
waste is done in an open building. The Volatile
Organic Compound (VOC) emissions from the
sludge must be drawn away to protect occupational health. A monitoring program assesses
environmental impacts so managers can decide
if further measures are required.
VOC emissions are involved in the formation of summer smog. Common reduction techniques are nitrogen traps, biological treatment.
Lessons Learnt
The many different types of customers and the
analysis of their different wastes require attention. Problems encountered in the transformation
process from waste to AFR and in the clinker production due to unexpected pollutants in the
waste, can be avoided by a frequent analysis of
waste samples and securing the traceability of
the waste from the customer to the cement kiln.
The installation and running of pre-processing facilities requires development of strong relations with local communities. Their worries and
fears about the negative effects of waste treatment needed to be overcome. So Ecoltec planned
a series of open days for the public that included
a plant tour. Beside the general rules for preprocessing, special regulations are required for
certain wastes such as persistent organic pollutants. Although not critical from a technical point
of view, there remain public concerns about the
formation of dioxins and furans during the combustion of POPs.
xii
Scheme Alternative Fuel production
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xii
27.06.2006 10:18:58 Uhr
Case Study
Test Burns with PCDDs/PCD Monitoring
The Philippines Examples
Background
Co-processing in the cement industry is an alternative form of waste disposal. Especially high
calorific waste can be disposed of as alternative
fuels in the cement kilns to replace fossil fuels. In
all incineration processes, special attention must
be paid to the formation of polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) as unintentional byproducts of
chlorine and hydrocarbon precursors from the
raw materials.
The formation of dioxins and furans is known
to occur by “de novo synthesis” during cooling
within the temperature range from 450 to 200°C.
This can happen during the co-processing of halogenated waste in a kiln. In order to establish a better understanding of the destruction process in a
kiln, a trail burn was proposed to measure the unintentional by products. The test trial was carried out
in the Bulacan cement plant of the Union Cement
Corporation in the Philippines in November 2004.
The Conditions
The test was done for two reasons:
Y to demonstrate that co-processing is a pragmatic and environmentally sound way to treat
waste
Y to use a batch of 1,200 tons of imported pet
food, with a calorific value of 4,600 MJ and
chlorine content of 1.28 %. chloride. The pet
food was contaminated with mould toxins.
In comparison, the chloride content of coal
used in the Bulacan plant is only in the range of
zero to 0.08%. The greater amount of chlorine in
the pet food in the cement process increases the
probability of the formation of PCDDs/PCDFs.
The trial burn in the Bulacan Cement Plant complied with the Clean Air Act of the Philippines.
The Bulacan cement plant is equipped with
a semi-automatic facility for co-processing solid,
liquid, and sludge wastes as alternative fuels. The
units consist of a big feeding hopper and a conveyer, which carries the solid waste directly to the
riser duct below the inline calciner (ILC). From
there the waste materials are introduced into the
kiln on the secondary side.
The Test Trial
All criteria for the test trial for measuring PCDDs/
PCDFs emissions in the stack gas has been
worked out and defined in a test protocol. According to this protocol, the test trial must be in
compliance with international regulations and
procedures, like the “US-EPA Codes of the Federal
Regulations (CFR) 40” and the “EU Directive
2000/76 EC on the incineration of waste”. The
trial included three test runs with the following
parameters:
Y
A blanc test run (without pet food), second test
run with a feeding rate of 1.75 tons pet food/
hour and a third test run with a feeding rate of
3.5 tons pet food/hour
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xiii
xiii
27.06.2006 10:18:59 Uhr
Stack with the monitoring platform and the adjustment of the probe into the kiln
Y
Y
Y
Y
The cement kiln did run in the “Compound
mode (the normal working conditions)”
The sampling time of the stack gas took 6-8
hours per run. The stack gas sampling started
only after all process parameters of the cement kiln were stable
All standard operating and emission parameters were monitored continuously
The trail burn and the testing were carried out
on three following days.
For the performance of the stack gas sampling and analysis to get reliable results the following qualified test methods of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency US-EAP Methods 1,
2, 3A, 4, 5, and 23 as well as the European Standard EN 1948-2 were used. The stack gas was collected with a special probe on the stack sampling
platform of the cement kiln. The PCDDs/PCDFs
were collected in a combined condenser with a
XAD-2 resin absorbent trap. In a specialized laboratory in Australia the PCDDs/PCDFs were analyzed by using a high resolution gas chromatography/mass spectrometer in accordance with
US-EPA Method 1613A.
Depending on the outcome of the evaluation, a trail should be carried out to evaluate the
emissions in the stack gas of the cement plant as
well as to calculate the risks for the environment.
Co-processing is playing a more and more a
significant role in waste management in developing countries. Test trails are an important tool
to get information about the expected emissions and the behavior of the waste during the
destruction process.
Good practice
The decision to start co-processing waste and to
carry out a test depends on the chemical composition as well as the quantity of the waste. The
relevant national agency should be involved in
the planning process in a very early stage. Cement plants should execute co-processing and
test trails only if they are able to abide by the
national emission standards.
The test results of the stack samples of this
trial were all below 0.1 ng TEQ/Sm3, which is the
limit value in the European legislation for hazardous waste incineration plants (Council Directive 2000/76/ EC). The results reveal clearly that
the co-processing of the pet food has no effect
on the emissions.
The semi-automatic co-processing facility for solid waste
Lessons Learnt
Before the start of the co-processing, it is important to study the chemical structure and the decomposition process of the waste under the
conditions of cement kilns.
xiv
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com | www.gtz.de/chs
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xiv
27.06.2006 10:18:59 Uhr
Case Study
AFR Quality Control Laboratory
The Example of Resotec, Brazil
Background
Resotec, a division of Holcim (Brasil) S/A, operates
two waste pre-processing facilities close to its
Pedro Leopoldo and Cantagalo cement plants.
Each facility has an installed capacity of about
120,000 tons per year.
In order to qualify candidate waste streams
for both pre-processing and co-processing in the
cement kilns, Resotec has established detailed
quality control plans at each plant. The control
plans are based on protocols that include administrative procedures, sampling strategies, and
analytical test programs for wastes shipped to
the facilities and finally for processed waste
streams to be fed to the cement kilns. Specialized
AFR laboratories are an essential part of Resotec’s
waste management strategy.
Y Physical
and chemical characterization of
incoming wastes and outgoing AFR
Y Control of legal aspects and internal technical
specifications (i.e. comparison against permitspecifications and internal requirements)
Y Environmental monitoring and analysis
of waste water, soil or stack emission
Y Environmental control (i.e. heavy metals analyses) of products of the cement plant (clinker,
cement, filter dust).
The laboratory equipment comprises a comprehensive set of state-of-the-art analytical instruments such as ICP spectrometer (for heavy
metals analyses), gas chromatograph (for organics, PCBs), calorimeter (calorific value), sulfur and
chlorine analyzers, flash point meter, viscosimeter
and others. The total of about USD 500,000 was
invested in this analytical equipment.
Process
At Pedro Leopoldo, a large variety of wastes is coprocessed in the kilns, including waste oils, solvents, industrial sludges, and impregnated solids
(plastics, textiles etc.).
Pedro Leopoldo runs a modern AFR laboratory at its pre-processing site with five trained
chemists and laboratory assistants. Between
200 and 300 analyses are carried out every
month on average. The major tasks of the laboratory include:
Zero Head Space Extractor for the Determination
of Volatile Components
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xv
xv
27.06.2006 10:19:00 Uhr
Service Brochure of Resotec AFR Laboratory Components
Good Practice
All laboratory assistants receive training in complying with the facility’s stringent requirements
with regard to analytical performance and health
and safety in the workplace.
The pre-processing facility including the
AFR laboratory has obtained certification against
the international standards ISO 9001 (quality
management) and ISO 14001 (environmental
management). In the framework of these certifications the laboratory has developed a series of
standard operating procedures for all tests applied.
Unidade Pedro Leopoldo
The AFR laboratory participates in various
national and international interlaboratory proficiency tests in order to verify and improve its
analytical capabilities and in order to increase
the confidence of their clients.
Further Development
The AFR laboratory has started to offer its services to third parties on the market. The revenues
from these external services have reduced the
operating costs of the laboratory significantly.
ICP Spectrometer for the Determination of Heavy Metals
Lessons Learnt
The chemical and physical characterization of
highly variable waste streams is an extremely
demanding task both with regard to professional
skills of laboratory personnel and to selection of
analytical equipment and infrastructure.
Standardized test procedures have to be
adapted frequently to the specific characteristics
of a waste stream. Obtaining representative samples of wastes delivered in different types of
packaging, e.g. drums, or out of a load of very
heterogeneous materials, requires a sophisticated sampling strategy. A brochure has been
published by Resotec describing the services and
capabilities of their AFR laboratories.
xvi
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
www.resotec.com.br
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xvi
27.06.2006 10:19:01 Uhr
Case Study
Erika Waste Recovery
The Example of Holcim Support for Oil Tanker Spill Clean-up, France
Background
Environmental disaster struck in December 1999
when the oil tanker Erika was wrecked off the
coast of France, spilling thousands of tons of oil
that washed ashore on the fragile beaches of
Brittany.
Clean-up was hampered by rough weather,
and 19,000 tons of oil produced over 300,000
tons of waste. The responsible tanker operator
wanted to find a way to recycle the waste as a
material or energy source.
Process
Holcim France Benelux was engaged to help dispose of some of the recovered waste by coprocessing the sludge as alternative fuels and
raw materials (AFR) in our cement kilns. But before the contract was awarded, a rigorous review
was conducted and our technology carefully examined in action.
The BEMTI (Boues d’Epuration Mixtes
Traitées Industriellement) process set up at the
Holcim Obourg plant in 1998 is unique in the cement sector and is used for the recovery of
chiefly mineral residues.
Trials were also carried out at the Rochefort
cement plant, where a pyrolysis kiln is used for preprocessing, before the recovery of mineral waste
containing organic components (hydrocarbons).
Once the trials were successfully completed,
the first waste shipment arrived at Obourg in
January 2003. In all, more than 20,000 tons of pretreated sludge (limed and pressed) were fed into
the kiln lines of Holcim France-Benelux.
Good Practice
The expertise that Holcim’s AFR team had acquired over more than 15 years in the field was
key to winning the contract.
The dedication and hard work of Holcim specialists was more than matched by the Group’s technology. Holcim has an established program of
sharing knowledge and multiplying good practices across its global operations.
Further Development
It is clear that our AFR solutions enable the
Group to respond to growing demands from industry and local authorities for waste treatment
across an ever-widening range of applications.
Respect for the environmental and a commitment to sustainable development underpin
Holcim know-how, while the Group’s AFR policy
provides strong and responsible principles to
guide behavior.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xvii
xvii
27.06.2006 10:19:01 Uhr
Feeding the sludge into the kilns.
Lessons Learnt
Demonstrating the Group’s ability to contribute to
difficult waste recovery solutions builds Holcim’s
own experience and expertise while growing our
reputation as a responsible service provider.
Now that Holcim has gained this know-how,
demonstrating it so convincingly in this example,
the Group is in an excellent position to offer this
solution for similar environmental disasters if and
when they arise.
19,000 tons of spilled oil produced more than 300,000 tons of waste.
REFERENCES
More than 20,000 tons of pretreated sludge (limed and pressed)
were fed into the kiln lines of Holcim France-Benelux.
xviii
www.coprocem.com
www.holcim.com/sustainable
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xviii
27.06.2006 10:19:02 Uhr
Case Study
Community Advisory Panels
The Example of Energis in Albox, Spain
Background
Activities
In 2003, Holcim Spain opened the waste pretreatment platform of its AFR subsidiary Energis
in Albox, Andalusia.
Management saw the need to open the plant’s
doors to the community, giving it an opportunity
to see and hear first-hand about plant operations.
On November 4, 2005, more than 100 guests
toured the facilities. Of particular interest were
areas of the plant where waste is collected and
classified as well as the company laboratories
where waste samples are analyzed prior to their
acceptance.
Running a new industrial activity in town,
local management recognized the value of stakeholder engagement and dialogue with the community, decided to establish a community advisory panel (CAP) from the beginning.
Holcim actively encourages all operational
sites to engage with stakeholders and has developed Guideline recommendations and a process
model to assist local management in their engagement activities.
Stakeholder Voices
As a representative of the center for environmental studies for the Almanzora River and a member of the NGO “Ecologistas en Accion”, Martin
Berbel Granados has also taken the role of secretary for the CAP in Albox.
Process
The objective of the CAP is to inform and involve
all relevant stakeholders regarding plant operations, through active and direct dialogue. Stakeholders invited to join the group included the
mayor of Albox, other local authorities, representatives of environmental and community
groups, and Energis management.
“The Albox CAP is an important tool for
‘greening’ the town through educational
projects,” he said. “To ensure transparency, we
will develop Guidelines for its operation, a website disclosing its activities, and will invite a
health expert to join.”
The CAP sees its role as being an active
company-community mediator. This extends to
the development of an external coordination
plan in the event of an accident, where CAP
members have defined roles and follow public
alert protocols.
Good Practice
Holcim has an established program of sharing
knowledge and multiplying good practices across
its global operations. Experiences with AFR stakeholder engagement in other locations have
informed the Albox CAP’s priorities of safety and
environmental performance.
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xix
xix
27.06.2006 10:19:02 Uhr
Further Development
Lessons Learnt
Following more than a year of operations, an
assessment was undertaken seeking the input of
both plant employees and panel members.
Results of the review indicated that the CAP’s
role was well perceived.
Of highest priority to the community was assurance about plant safety as well as the AFR process
itself. During 2004-2005, three accident simulations were undertaken, involving plant employees
and local emergency services.
Yet there was potential for improvement,
notably to differentiate the plant from its immediate neighbor, a landfill, as well as to communicate more about CAP activities and the value
they have brought to the community.
As a result, recommendations to improve
the plant’s emergency response were made, thus
alleviating community concerns.
There was also a request to focus corporate
social responsibility activities on educational priorities, including environmental, waste and recycling issues.
In a spirit of transparency, the CAP has promoted public access to all company documents
relevant to safety and environment. These are
available from the Town Hall and include impact
assessments, emissions data, safety reports and
hazardous waste declarations.
Energis director of quality, Isidora Diaz (right),
meets the CAP secretary Martin Berbel Granados (left).
Granados believes the CAP is an important tool
for ‘greening’ the town.
REFERENCES
www.coprocem.com
www.holcim.com/sustainable
xx
95070_Guidelines.indd Abs3:xx
27.06.2006 10:19:03 Uhr
Index of Annexes
Annex 1
Bibliography, Literature and Internet links
A2
Annex 2
Waste used for AFR in Europe and Japan
A5
Annex 3
Development of the utilization of alternative fuels in the German cement industry
A7
Annex 4
Source for contacts and information
A8
Annex 5
List of waste material suited for co-processing
A10
Annex 6
Example of an Accept-Refuse Chart
A18
Annex 7
Limit values for waste and AFR
A19
Annex 8
Justification for the exclusion of certain waste material from co-processing
A22
Annex 9
Permit model
A25
Annex 10
Application form
A30
Annex 11
Permitting process
A34
Annex 12
Information on test burn
A35
Annex 13
EPER – The European Polluting Emissions Register for the cement industry
A37
Annex 14
Ranges of emissions and reduction techniques
A38
Annex 15
Total emission limit values for cement kilns co-processing waste
A41
Annex 16
Summary of the WBCSD/UNEP report on POPs
A42
Annex 17
Template for master data file for common used waste
A45
Annex 18
AFR quality control scheme
A49
Annex 19
Situation analysis – how to do it
A50
95070_Guidelines.indd A1
A1
27.06.2006 10:19:03 Uhr
Annex 1: Bibliography, Literature and Internet Links
Literature
Austrian Standard Önorm S 2100
http://www.zement.at/downloads/positivliste3.pdf
BUWAL, 1998. Guidelines, Disposal of waste in cement plants
http://www.umwelt-schweiz.ch/buwal/eng/fachgebiete/fg_abfall/anlagen/andere/zw/
Cembureau, 2002. Activity Report 2002
http://www.cembureau.be/Documents/Publications/Activity_Report_2002.pdf
Cembureau, 2003. Activity Report 2003
http://www.cembureau.be/Documents/Publications/Activity%20Report%202003.pdf
Cembureau, 1999. Best Available Technology for the cement industry
http://www.cembureau.be/Documents/Publications/CEMBUREAU_BAT_Reference_Document_2000-03.pdf
Cembureau ,2003. Trace element leaching from concrete. – Final Draft
Commission Decision of 16 January 2001 amending Decision 2000/532/EC as regards the list of wastes
http://www.vrom.nl/get.asp?file=/docs/milieu/eural_engelse_versie.pdf
Commission decision, 2001. Commission decision of 16 January 2001
amending Decision 2000/532/EC as regards the list of wastes
http://www.grc.cf.ac.uk/lrn/resources/hazardous/catalogue.php
Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control
http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=31996L0061&
model=guichett
Directive 200/76/EC of the European Parliament and the council of 4. December 2000 on the incineration of waste
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/wasteinc/newdir/2000-76_en.pdf
European Pollution Emission Register, 2004
http://www.eper.cec.eu.int/eper/default.asp
European Commission– Directorate General Environment, 2003.
Refuse Derived Fuel, Current Practice And Perspectives (B4-3040/2000/306517/Mar/E3) Final Report. Ref: Co5087-4
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/waste/studies/rdf.pdf
European Environment Agency, Market-based instruments
for environmental policy en Europe»; EEA Technical report, no. 08/2005.
http://eea.eu.int/technical_report_2005_8/en/EEA_technical_report_8_2005.pdf
European Environment Agency, Using the market for cost-effective environmental policy»;
EEA Technical report, no. 01/2006.
http://reports.eea.eu.int/eea_report_2006_1/en/EEA_report_1_2006.pdf
A2
27.06.2006 10:19:03 Uhr
Fehrenbach, Horst: Ökobilanzielle Überprüfung von Anlagenkonzepten zur
thermischen Entsorgung von Abfällen – Müllverbrennung, Kraftwerk, Zementwerk. Februar 2005.
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) – European Commission, Dec. 2001.
Reference document on Best Available Technology in the Cement and Lime manufacturing industries
http://eippcb.jrc.es
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) – European Commission, Draft Jan.
2004. Draft Reference document on Best Available Technology for the waste treatments industries
http://eippcb.jrc.es
Jacott, Reed, 2003. Energy Use in the Cement Industry in North America: Emissions,
Waste Generation and Pollution Control, 1990-2001
http://www.texascenter.org/publications/cement.pdf
Ministerium für Umwelt und Naturschutz, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz
des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen/MUNLV (ed.), 2003. Leitfaden zur energetischen Verwertung
von Abfällen in Zement-, Kalk- und Kraftwerken in Nordrhein-Westfalen
Umweltbundesamt Österreich. Szednyj I. and Schindler I., 2004. Berichte BE-237
Aktuelle Entwicklungen hinsichtlich Abfalleinsatz
und Emissionsminderungstechniken in der Zementindustrie
UNEP, 1989. Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements
of hazardous wastes and their disposal adopted 22 march 1989
http://www.basel.int/text/con-e-rev.pdf
UNEP, 2001.Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
http://www.pops.int/documents/convtext/convtext_en.pdf
WBCSD / Batelle, 2002. Toward a Sustainable Cement Industry
http://www.wbcsdcement.org/final_reports.asp
WBCSD, 2004. Safety in the cement industry: Guidelines for measuring and reporting
http://www.wbcsd.ch/DocRoot/VZpgC7RnJ4V20goVx8jW/cement-safety-guide.pdf
WBCSD, 2005. Guidelines for the Selection and Use of Fuels
and Raw Materials in the Cement Manufacturing Process
http://www.wbcsd.com
WBCSD, 21005. Report on CO2 Accounting & Reporting Standard for the Cement Industry.
http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/cement-tf1.pdf
030311, European Dioxin Inventory – Results Cement
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/dioxin/stage1/cement.pdf
A3
27.06.2006 10:19:04 Uhr
Annex 1: Bibliography, Literature and Internet Links
Internet links
Cembureau, 2005
http://www.cembureau.be
Verein Deutscher Zementwerke (VDZ), 2005
http://www.vdz-online.de/home.htm
Holcim, 2005
http://www.holcim.com
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), 2005
http://www.wbcsd.ch
Gesellschaft für technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GTZ), 2005
http://www.gtz.de
FHNW, Institute of Ecopreneurship (IEC), 2006
http://www.fhnw.ch/lifesciences/iec
European Commission, 2005
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/index_en.htm
Portland Cement Association, 2005
http://www.cement.org/
Japan Cement Association, 2005
http://www.jcassoc.or.jp/Jca/English/Ue.html
The Swiss Institute of Safety and Security
http://www.swissi.ch
A4
27.06.2006 10:19:04 Uhr
Annex 2: Waste used for AFR in Europe and Japan
Table 2.1: Utilization of alternative Fuels in the European Cement Industry (2002)
Alternative fuels
Quantity in kT/y
Energy in TJ
Substitution rate
Animal meal & bone meal & animal fat
760
15’000
2.0%
Tires
500
13’200
1.8%
Other hazardous
360
6’500
0.9%
Plastic
210
5’000
0.7%
Paper/ cardboards/ wood/ PAS
180
2’800
0.4%
Impregnated sawdust
165
1’900
0.3%
Coal slurries/ distillation residues
110
1’650
0.2%
Sludge (paper fiber, sewage)
100
970
0.1%
Fine/ anodes/ chemical cokes
90
1’600
0.2%
RDF
40
530
0.1%
Shale/ oil shale
15
130
<0.1%
Packaging waste
12
260
<0.1%
Agricultural & organic wastes
10
170
<0.1%
Other non hazardous
730
14’100
1.9%
Subtotal solid fuels (75%)
3’282
63’810
8.5%
Waste oil and oiled water
380
13’500
1.8%
Solvents and others
260
3’900
0.5%
Other hazardous liquid fuels
170
4’300
0.6%
Subtotal liquid fuels (25%)
810
21’700
2.9%
Total
4’092
85’510
11.4%
A5
27.06.2006 10:19:04 Uhr
Annex 2: Waste used for AFR in Europe and Japan
Table 2.2: Utilization of alternative raw material
in the European cement industry (2002)
Alternative raw materials
Silicon (Si)
Calcium (Ca)
Iron (Fe)
Aluminum (Al)
Si – Al - Ca
Quantity in kT/y
Substitution rate
Foundry sand
131
2.2%
Sand
93
1.6%
Ca-sources
396
6.7%
Waste limestone
438
7.4%
Fe-containing material
699
11.8%
Blastfurnace & converter slag
215
3.6%
Pyrite ash
438
7.4%
Al-containing materials
150
2.5%
Industrial sludge
137
2.3%
Other Si-Al-Ca containing material
247
4.2%
Fly ash
1140
19.3%
Others
1823
30.8%
Total
5907
Table 2.3: Utilization of alternative fuels in
the Japanese cement industry (2001)
Type of waste
Use at cement plant
Weight (‘000 ton)
Blast Furnace
Raw Material, Mixing Material
11,915
Coal Ash
Raw Material, Mixing Material
5,822
By-product Gypsum
Raw Material(Additive)
2,568
Low Quality Coal from Mine
Raw Material, Fuel
574
Non-iron Slag
Raw Material
1,236
Revolving Furnace Slag
Raw Material
935
Sludge etc.
Raw Material, Fuel
2,235
Soot & Dust
Raw Material, Fuel
943
Molding Sand
Raw Material
492
Used Tires
Fuel
284
Waste Oils
Fuel
353
Spent Activated Clay
Fuel
82
Waste Plastics
Fuel
171
Others
Raw Material, Fuel
450
Total
A6
28,061
27.06.2006 10:19:05 Uhr
Annex 3: Development of the Utilization of
alternative Fuels in the German Cement Industry
10 8
Source: VDZ, 2003
A7
27.06.2006 10:19:05 Uhr
Annex 4: Sources for Contacts and Information
Organizations offering assistance and contacts for capacity building
in the field of co-processing and environmental monitoring
A8
Name
Address
Contact person
Field of competence
CEMBUREAU
Rue d’Arlon 55
1040 Brussels
Belgium-1040
Phone: +32-(0) 2 234 10 11
[email protected]
FHNW
University for Applied Sciences
Northwestern Switzerland
Institute for Ecopreneurship
St. Jakobs-Strasse 84
4132 Muttenz, Switzerland
Phone: +41-(0) 61 467 45 68
[email protected]
Dr. Dieter Mutz
Training & Capacity
building
GTZ
GmbH (GTZ)
Convention Project
Chemical Safety
PO Box 5180
65726 Eschborn, Germany
www.gtz.de/chs
Wolfgang Schimpf
Chemical substances
RP-NRW
Bezirksregierung Münster
Domplatz 1-3
48128 Münster, Germany
Phone: + 49-(0) 251 411 1550
[email protected]
Richard Bolwerk (Dipl. Ing)
Environment. AFR,
Legal Aspects
SINTEF
P.O Box 124 Bindern, NO-0314
Oslo, Norway
+47-(0) 22 06 73 00
[email protected]
Research Director
Kåre Helge Karstensen
Co-Processing of
Hazardous Wastes,
Obsolete pesticides and
POPs Environment
UBA
Umweltbundesamt
Postfach 33 00 22
14191 Berlin, Germany
Phone: +49-(0) 8903 3075
[email protected]
Dr. Silke Karcher
Dr. Bernicke
Steffi Richter
Mineral industry
Cement industry
POP
All about cement
production
27.06.2006 10:19:06 Uhr
Name
Address
Contact person
Field of competence
VDZ
Verein Deutscher Zementwerke e.V.
Forschungsinstitut
der Zementindustrie
Tannenstr. 2
40476 Düsseldorf, Germany
Phone: +49-(0) 211 45 78 1
[email protected]
All about cement
production
WBCSD
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
4, chemin de Conches
1231 Conches-Geneva
Switzerland
Phone: +41-(0) 22 8 39 31 00
[email protected]
Sustainable Development, Networking
A9
27.06.2006 10:19:07 Uhr
Annex 5: List of Waste Material suited
for co-processing 13
A. Industrial Wastes
1. 0 Organic Chemical Wastes | 1.1 Mineral oils, synthetic oils and fats
05 01 00
05 01 01
05 01 03
oil sludges and solid wastes
sludges from on-site effluent treatment
tank bottom sludges
12 01 00
12 01 06
12 01 07
12 01 08
12 01 09
12 01 10
wastes from shaping (including forging, welding, pressing,
drawing, turning, cutting and filing)
waste machining oils containing halogens (not emulsioned)
waste machining oils free of halogens (not emulsioned)
waste machining emulsions containing halogens
waste machining emulsions free of halogens
synthetic machining oils
13 01 00
13 01 01
13 01 02
13 01 03
13 01 04
13 01 05
13 01 06
13 01 07
waste hydraulic oils and brake fluids
hydraulic oils, containing PCBs or PCTs
other chlorinated hydraulic oils (not emulsions)
non-chlorinated hydraulic oils (not emulsions)
chlorinated emulsions
non-chlorinated emulsions
hydraulic oils containing only mineral oil
other hydraulic oils
13 02 00
13 02 01
13 02 02
13 02 03
waste engine, gear and lubricating oils
chlorinated engine, gear and lubricating oils
non-chlorinated engine, gear and lubricating oils
other engine, gear and lubricating oils
13 03 00
13 03 01
13 03 02
13 03 03
13 03 04
13 03 05
waste insulating and heat transmission oils and other liquids
insulating or heat transmission oils and other liquids containing PCBs
(chlorinated waste and PCB are subject to legal limitations,
maximum concentration in input and maximum T/year allowed)
other chlorinated insulating and heat transmission oils and other liquids
non-chlorinated insulating and heat transmission oils and other liquids
synthetic insulating and heat transmission oils and other liquids
mineral insulating and heat transmission oils and other liquids
13 04 00
13 04 01
13 04 02
13 04 03
bilge oils
bilge oils from inland navigation
bilge oils from jetty sewers
bilge oils from other navigation
13 This list is derived from the European Waste Catalogue but is not an exclusive and compulsory document. It gives a general overview of
possible wastes to be used as AFR in cement kilns.
A10
27.06.2006 10:19:07 Uhr
13 05 00
13 05 02
13 05 03
13 05 04
13 05 05
oil/water separator contents
oil/water separator sludges
interceptor sludges
desalter sludges or emulsions
other emulsions
13 06 00
13 06 01
oil waste not otherwise specified
oil waste not otherwise specified
1. 0 Organic Chemical Wastes | 1.2. Petrochemical wastes
05 01 00
05 01 01
05 01 02
05 01 03
05 01 04
05 01 05
05 01 06
05 01 99
oil sludges and solid wastes
desalter sludges
tank bottom sludges
acid alkyl sludges
oil spills
sludges from plant, equipment and maintenance operations
wastes not otherwise specified
05 05 00
05 05 01
oil desulphurisation waste
waste containing sulphur
05 06 00
05 06 01
05 06 03
05 06 04
waste from the pyrolytic treatment of coal
acid tars
other tars
waste from cooling columns
1. 0 Organic Chemical Wastes | 1.3 Solvents, paints, varnishes, glues (adhesive, sealants), organic rubbers
07 03 00
07 03 01
07 03 02
07 03 03
07 03 04
07 03 07
07 03 09
waste for the MFSU of organic dyes and pigments (excluding 06 11 00)
aqueous washing liquids and mother liquors
organic halogenated solvents, washing liquids and mother liquors
other organic solvents, washing liquids and mother liquors
halogenated still bottoms and reaction residues
halogenated filter cakes, spent absorbents
08 01 00
08 01 01
08 01 02
08 01 03
wastes from the MFSU of paint and varnish
waste paints and varnish containing halogenated solvents
waste paints and varnish free of halogenated solvents
waste from water-based paints and varnishes
A11
27.06.2006 10:19:07 Uhr
for co-processing
08 01 06
08 01 07
08 01 08
08 01 09
08 01 99
sludges from paint and varnish removal containing halogenated solvents
sludges from paint and varnish removal free of halogenated solvents
aqueous sludges containing paint or varnish
wastes from paint or varnish (except 08 01 05 and 08 01 06)
08 03 00
08 03 01
08 03 02
wastes from the MFSU of printing inks
waste ink containing halogenated solvents
waste ink free of halogenated solvents
08 04 00
08 04 01
08 04 02
08 04 03
08 04 05
08 04 06
08 04 07
08 04 08
wastes from the MFSU of adhesives and sealants
(including waterproofing products)
waste adhesive and sealants containing halogenated solvents
waste adhesive and sealants free of halogenated solvents
waste from water-based adhesive and sealants
adhesive and sealants sludges containing halogenated solvents
adhesive and sealants sludges free of halogenated solvents
aqueous sludges containing adhesive and sealants
aqueous liquid waste containing adhesive and sealants
14 05 00
14 05 01
14 05 02
14 05 03
14 05 04
14 05 05
wastes from solvent and coolant recovery (still bottoms)
chlorofluorocarbons
other halogenated solvents and solvent mixes
other solvents and solvent mixes
sludges containing halogenated solvents
sludges containing other solvents
1. 0 Organic Chemical Wastes | 1.4 Wastes from synthetic materials and rubbers
07 02 00
07 02 01
07 02 02
07 02 03
07 02 04
07 02 07
07 02 08
A12
waste for the MFSU of plastics, synthetic rubber and man-made fibres
other still bottoms and reaction residues
27.06.2006 10:19:08 Uhr
2. 0 Other Chemical Wastes
03 02 00
03 02 01
03 02 02
wood preservation waste
non-halogenated organic wood preservatives
organochlorinated wood preservatives
03 03 00
03 03 05
03 03 06
wastes from pulp, paper and cardboard production and processing
de-inking sludges from paper recycling
fiber and paper sludge
04 01 00
04 01 03
wastes from the leather industry
degreasing wastes containing solvents without a liquor phase
04 02 00
04 02 11
04 02 13
wastes from textile industry
halogenated waste from dressing and finishing
dye stuffs and pigments
07 01 00
07 01 01
07 01 02
07 01 03
07 01 04
07 01 07
07 01 08
waste from the manufacture, formulation, supply and use (MFSU)
of basic organic chemicals
07 04 00
07 04 01
07 04 02
07 04 03
07 04 04
07 04 07
07 04 08
waste for the MFSU of organic pesticides
07 05 00
07 05 01
07 05 02
07 05 03
07 05 04
07 05 07
07 05 08
waste for the MFSU of pharmaceuticals
A13
27.06.2006 10:19:08 Uhr
for co-processing
A14
07 06 00
07 06 01
07 06 02
07 06 03
07 06 04
07 06 07
07 06 08
waste for the MFSU of fats, grease, soaps, detergents, disinfectants and cosmetics
07 07 00
07 07 01
07 07 02
07 07 03
07 07 04
07 07 07
07 07 08
waste for the MFSU of fine chemical products not otherwise specified
08 03 00
08 03 03
08 03 05
08 03 06
08 03 07
08 03 08
08 03 99
wastes from the MFSU of printing inks
waste from water-based inks
ink sludges containing halogenated solvents
ink sludges free of halogenated solvents
aqueous sludges containing ink
aqueous liquid waste containing ink
09 01 00
09 01 01
09 01 02
09 01 03
09 01 04
09 01 05
wastes from the photographic industries
water based developer and activator solutions
water based offset plate developer solutions
solvent based developer solutions
fixer solution
bleach solutions and bleach fixer solutions
10 03 00
10 03 01
wastes from aluminum thermal metallurgy
tars and other carbon-containing wastes from anode manufacture
14 01 00
14 01 01
14 01 02
14 01 03
14 01 04
14 01 05
14 01 06
14 01 07
waste from metal degreasing and machinery maintenance
chlorofluorocarbons
aqueous solvent mixes containing halogens
aqueous solvent mixes free of halogens
sludges and solid wastes containing halogenated solvents
sludges and solid wastes free of halogenated solvents
27.06.2006 10:19:08 Uhr
14 02 00
14 02 01
14 02 02
14 02 03
14 02 04
wastes from textile cleaning and degreasing of natural products
halogenated solvents and solvent mixes
solvent mixes or organic liquids free of halogenated solvents
sludges and solid wastes containing other solvents
14 03 00
14 03 01
14 03 02
14 03 03
14 03 04
14 03 05
wastes from the electronic industry
chlorofluorocarbons
14 04 00
14 04 01
14 04 02
14 04 03
14 04 04
14 04 05
wastes from coolants, foam/aerosols propellants
chlorofluorocarbons
16 03 00
16 03 02
off-specification batches
organic off-specification batches
16 05 00
16 05 03
chemicals and gases in containers
other wastes containing organic chemicals,
e.g. lab chemicals not otherwise specified
17 03 00
17 03 03
asphalt, tar and tarred products
tar and tar products
18 02 00
18 02 04
waste from research, diagnosis, prevention of diseases involving animals
discarded chemicals
A15
27.06.2006 10:19:09 Uhr
for co-processing
B. Wastes of Animal and Vegetal Origin
(except municipal, textile, agricultural and hospital wastes)
1.0 Fats and oils from animal and vegetal origin
02 01 00
02 01 01
02 01 06
primary production waste
sludges from washing and cleaning
animal feces, urine and manure (including spoiled straw), effluent,
collected separately and treated off-site
02 02 00
wastes from the preparation and processing of meat,
fish and other foods of animal origin
sludges from washing and cleaning
materials unsuitable for consumption or processing
02 02 01
02 02 03
02 02 04
02 03 00
02 03 01
02 03 02
02 03 03
02 03 04
02 03 05
wastes from fruit, vegetables, cereals, edible oils,
cocoa, coffee and tobacco preparation,
processing; conserve production; tobacco processing
sludges from washing, cleaning, peeling, centrifuging and separation
wastes from preserving agents
wastes from solvent extraction
02 04 00
02 04 03
wastes from sugar processing
02 05 00
02 05 01
02 05 02
wastes from dairy products industry
02 06 00
02 06 02
02 06 03
wastes from backing and confectionery industry
wastes from preserving agents
02 07 00
wastes from the production of alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages
(excluding coffee, tea and cocoa)
wastes from washing, cleaning and mechanical reduction of the raw material
wastes from spirits distillation
wastes from chemical treatment
02 07 01
02 07 02
02 07 03
02 07 04
02 07 05
A16
27.06.2006 10:19:09 Uhr
C. Other Wastes
1.0 Disposed, sorted and/or stocked wastes from a waste treatment facility
05 08 00
05 08 02
05 08 03
05 08 04
waste from oil regeneration
acid tars
other tars
aqueous liquid waste from oil regeneration
14 05 00
14 05 01
14 05 02
14 05 03
14 05 04
14 05 05
wastes from solvent and coolant recovery (still bottoms)
chlorofluorocarbons
other halogenated solvents and solvent mixtures
other solvents and solvent mixtures
sludge containing halogenated solvents
sludge containing other solvents
16 07 00
16 07 01
16 07 02
16 07 02
16 07 03
16 07 04
16 07 05
16 07 06
waste from transport and storage tank cleaning (except 05 00 00 & 12 00 00)
wastes from marine transport tank cleaning, containing chemicals
wastes from marine transport tank cleaning, containing oil
wastes from marine transport tank cleaning, containing oil
wastes from railway and road transport tank cleaning, containing oil
wastes from railway and road transport tank cleaning, containing chemicals
wastes from storage tank cleaning, containing chemicals
wastes from storage tank cleaning, containing oil
Wastes from drums and tanks treatment facility, contaminated by one or more
constituent enumerated in Annex II of Directive 91/689/CEE
19 01 00
19 01 08
wastes from incineration or pyrolysis of municipal and similar commercial, industrial and instit. waste
pyrolysis wastes
19 06 00
19 06 01
19 06 02
wastes from anaerobic treatment of wastes
anaerobic treatment sludges of municipal and similar wastes
anaerobic treatment sludges of animal and vegetable wastes
19 07 00
19 07 01
landfill leachate
landfill leachate
19 08 00
19 08 03
wastes from waste water treatment plants not otherwise specified
grease and oil mixture from oil/waste water separation
20 01 00
20 01 09
20 01 12
20 01 13
20 01 16
20 01 18
20 01 19
20 03 00
20 03 04
separately collected fractions
oil and fat
paint, inks, adhesive and resins
solvents
detergents
medicines
pesticides
other municipal waste
septic tank sludge
A17
27.06.2006 10:19:09 Uhr
Annex 6: Example of an Accept-Refuse Chart
Accept or Refuse Flowchart for a Cement Plant Operator
Does the waste or method
comply with the company’s AFR policy?
no
refuse
yes
yes
accept
Energy recovery
accept
Material recovery
accept
Energy & Material recovery
accept
Waste disposal / Waste destruction
no
Ash >50% and
raw materials** in ash >80%?
yes
no
Raw Materials** >0% and
GCV* of the rest >8 MJ/kg
yes
AFR
GCV* of total waste > 8 MJ/kg
and raw materials** = 0%
no
Resolution of a local waste
management problem ?
yes
no
refuse
A18
GCV*
gross calorific value
Raw materials** CaO, SiO , AI O , Fe O , SO
2 2 3 2 3
3
27.06.2006 10:19:10 Uhr
Annex 7: Limit Values for Waste and AFR
Table 7.1: Limit Values in different Permits and Regulations in Austria, Switzerland
and Germany for used Wastes for co-processing
Austria1
Switzerland2
In general
combustible
wastes4
Plastic, paper,
textile waste,
wood, etc.
high calorific
fraction from
common waste
Solvents,
spent oil,
waste
lacquers
15
15
20
In general
combustible
wastes5
Other
wastes for
disposal
Germany3
Plastic, paper,
textile waste,
wood, etc.
high calorific
fraction from
common waste6
Solvents,
spent oil
13
15
120
20
Maximum values [mg/kg]
As
100
15
5
8004
Sb
5
Be
5
2
2
Pb
200
500
800
200
500
400
150
Cd
2
27
20
2
5
9
4
Cr
100
300
300
100
500
250
50
Cu
100
500
500
100
600
700
180
Co
20
100
25
20
60
12
25
Ni
100
200
100
80
160
30
Hg
0,5
2
2
0,5
58
1,2
1
Tl
3
10
5
3
2
2
V
100
100
25
10
Zn
400
400
Sn
Cl
(total)
PCBs
10
70
70
30
1%
2%
50
20
(200)7
5
100
10
1,5%
100
1 voluntary self-commitment of the cement industry with authorities and concerned ministry
2 BUWAL, Co-processing Guidelines from Switzerland
3 voluntary self-commitment from the waste industry and regulations from the Government North Rhine Westfalia (NRW) Germany
4 net calorific value 25 MJ/kg
5 net calorific value average value 18 MJ/kg
6 PET
7 PET, Polyester
8 special case, flue gas cleaning for Hg
A19
27.06.2006 10:19:10 Uhr
Annex 7: Limit Values for Waste and AFR
Table 7.2: Examples of limit Values for alternative Fuels
for different Countries / Regions based on individual Permits
Unit
Spain14
Belgium1
France1
Calorific values
MJ/kg
-
-
-
halogens (exp.as Cl)
Cl
F
%
%
2
0.20%
2
-
2
-
Parameter
S
%
3%
3%
3%
Ba
mg/kg
-
-
-
Ag
mg/kg
-
-
-
Hg
mg/kg
10
5
10
Cd
mg/kg
100
70
-
Tl
mg/kg
100
30
-
Sum Hg + Cd + Tl
mg/kg
100
-
100
Sb
mg/kg
-
200
-
Sum Sb+ As+Co+ Ni+ Pb+ Sn+ V+ Cr
mg/kg
0.50%
2500
2500
As
mg/kg
-
200
-
Co
mg/kg
-
200
-
Ni
mg/kg
-
1000
-
Cu
mg/kg
-
1000
-
Cr
mg/kg
-
1000
-
V
mg/kg
-
1000
-
Pb
mg/kg
-
1000
-
Sn
mg/kg
-
-
-
Mn
mg/kg
-
2000
-
Be
mg/kg
-
50
-
Se
mg/kg
-
50
-
Te
mg/kg
-
50
-
Zn
mg/kg
-
5000
-
PCBs
mg/kg
30
30
25
PCDDs/PCDFs
mg/kg
-
-
-
Br+I
mg/kg
-
2000
-
Cyanide
mg/kg
-
100
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
14
A20
voluntary self-commitment of the cement industry with authorities and concerned ministry
BUWAL, Co-processing Guidelines from Switzerland
voluntary self-commitment from the waste industry and regulations from the Government North Rhine Westfalia (NRW) Germany
net calorific value 25 MJ/kg
net calorific value average value 18 MJ/kg
PET
PET, Polyester
special case, flue gas cleaning for Hg
Limit values set by authorities for individual permits for cement plants in Spain, Belgium and France
27.06.2006 10:19:11 Uhr
Table 7.3: Examples of limit Values for Waste to be used as
alternative Raw Materials in different Countries / Regions
Parameter
Unit
Spain15
Belgium1
France1
Switzerland16
TOC
mg/kg
2%
5000
5000
-
Total halogens (expr.as Cl)
%
0,.25
0.5
0.5
-
F
%
0,1
-
-
-
S
%
3
1
1
-
Hg
mg/kg
10
-
-
0.5
Cd
mg/kg
100
-
-
0.8
Tl
mg/kg
100
-
-
1
Sum Hg + Cd + Tl
mg/kg
100
-
-
-
Sb
mg/kg
-
-
-
1
Sum Sb+As+ Co+Ni+
Pb+ Sn+V+ Cr
mg/kg
0.50%
-
-
-
As
mg/kg
-
-
-
20
Co
mg/kg
-
-
-
30
Ni
mg/kg
-
-
-
100
Cu
mg/kg
-
-
-
100
Cr
mg/kg
-
-
-
100
V
mg/kg
-
-
-
200
Pb
mg/kg
-
-
-
50
Sn
mg/kg
-
-
-
50
Mn
mg/kg
-
-
-
-
Be
mg/kg
-
-
-
3
Se
mg/kg
-
-
-
1
Te
mg/kg
-
-
-
-
Zn
mg/kg
-
-
-
400
PCBs
mg/kg
30
-
-
1
pH
mg/kg
-
-
-
-
Br+I
mg/kg
-
-
-
-
Cyanide
mg/kg
-
-
-
-
15 Limit values set by authorities for individual permits for specific cement plants in Spain, Belgium and France
16 Limit values for alternative raw materials, BUWAL 1998. Guidelines Disposal of Wastes in Cement plants, table 1
A21
27.06.2006 10:19:11 Uhr
Annex 8: Justification for the Exclusion of certain
Waste Material from co-processing
1. Electronic waste
E-waste is composed of computer and accessories, entertainment electronics, communication electronics,
toys but also white goods such as kitchen devices or
medical apparatus. A recent study17 of the Swiss environment agency BAFU reveals that average electronic
scrap consists of 45% of metals in terms of weight, with
the highest portion on heavy metals and rare metals.
With 23%, plastic ranges second in the composition,
and compounds of picture tubes are at 20%.
3. Infectious and biologically active medical wastes
Infectious, biologically active hospital wastes are generated in the human medical, in veterinary care and in
the research. Examples are used blood transfusion
bags, blood contaminated bandages, dialyse filters, injection needles, and also parts of the body and organs.
Biologically active hospital wastes include pharmaceuticals. The disposal requires special hygienic and work
safety requirements on handling, packaging and transportation.
The average composition shows that electronic
scrap contains on one hand substances harmful to
health and the environment such as Cl, Br, P, Cd, Ni, Hg,
PCB and brominated flame retardants in high concentration, often higher then threshold limit values as
fixed in the permits.
The conditions in the cement kiln would be appropriate to treat infectious and biologically active hospital wastes, but would require special precautions on
occupational health and safety in the supply chain of
this type of waste. As the required OH&S conditions
can’t be fully assured, co-processing is presently not
recommended. However, the problem of inadequate
handling of medical waste has persisted for years, especially in developing countries. Although it is well known
that segregating waste at the source is the most important step in managing medical waste, this principle
is not yet sufficiently applied. Even less attention is
given to the ultimate safe storage and final treatment
(sterilization or microwave) of infectious waste.
On the other hand, the scrap contains so much
scarce precious metals that all efforts have to be undertaken to recycle it. Co-processing of the plastic parts of
the electronic waste would be an interesting option but
requires disassembling and segregation first.
2. Entire Batteries
Batteries can be classified as automotive batteries, industrial batteries and portable (consumer) batteries.
Automotive batteries are mainly lead-acid batteries;
industrial batteries comprise both lead-acid batteries
and nickel-cadmium batteries. The portable battery
consists of general purpose batteries (mainly zinc carbon and alkaline manganese batteries), button cells
(mainly mercury, zinc air, silver oxide, manganese oxide
and lithium batteries) and rechargeable batteries
(mainly nickel-cadmium, nickel-metal hydride, lithium
ion and sealed lead-acid batteries). Most of these substances are harmful to health and the environment.
Co-processing of batteries would lead to an undesirable
concentration of pollutants in the cement and the air
emissions. Also, some battery contents, such as mercury, nickel or cadmium, exceed any limit value for AFR. In
addition, commercially viable battery recycling plants
have been successfully introduced..
17
A22
Small medical waste incinerators have been promoted and introduced in the past in many countries as
a decentralized solution. However, experiences gained
show that this technology is in many cases not appropriate due to the absence of qualified personnel and
the high costs associated with building, operating,
maintaining and monitoring such facilities. As a consequence, the release of unwanted emissions (such as
PCDDs and PCDFs, hydrochloric acid or heavy metals) in
relatively high concentration must be considered.
As the problem persists and might become even
more severe with a wider spread of infectious diseases
(such as AIDS, SARS, Bird flu, Ebola etc.) co-processing
might become part of the solution for final treatment,
but only if defined pre-conditions in hospitals and
health care centers have been introduced. Future coop
Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 374, BUWAL, 2004
27.06.2006 10:19:12 Uhr
eration and research between international organizations such as the WHO and the cement industry could
result in joint activities, such as the definition of standardized handling procedures.
4. Mineral acids and corrosives
Mineral acids are derived from inorganic minerals. Examples are hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, phosphoric
acid and sulphuric acid (e.g. automotive batteries). The
inorganic minerals such as S and Cl that are the main
component of the acid have a negative impact on the
clinker process and product quality and may lead to
unwanted waste gas emissions. Acid may corrode and
damage the production facilities.
Beside mineral acids, substances that can cause
severe damage by chemical reaction to living tissue, or
freight, or the means of transport are prohibited, as are
all corrosive substances. Well known examples are aluminium chloride; caustic soda; corrosive cleaning fluid;
corrosive rust remover/preventative; corrosive paint remover. These types of materials should be excluded
from co-processing due to the upstream collection,
transport risks and handling hazards.
5. Explosives
Explosives are any chemical compound, mixture or device capable of producing an explosive-pyrotechnic effect, with substantial instantaneous release of heat
and gas. Examples are nitro-glycerine, fireworks, blasting caps, fuses, flares, ammunition, etc. Reasons to exclude them from co-processing are occupational safety
due to the risk of uncontrolled explosions during preprocessing activities such transportation, handling,
shredding etc. Explosive reactions in the cement kiln
would have and negative impact on process stability.
6. Asbestos
Asbestos is a name given to a group of minerals that
occur naturally as masses of long silky fibers. Asbestos is
known for its unique properties of being resistant to
abrasion, inert to acid and alkaline solutions, and stable
at high temperatures. Because of these attributes, asbestos was widely used in construction and industry.
Asbestos fibers are woven together or incorporated
within other materials to create many products.
Airborne asbestos fibres are small, odourless and
tasteless. They range in size from 0.1 to 10 microns in
length (a human hair is about 50 microns in diameter).
Because asbestos fibres are small and light, they can be
suspended in the air for long periods. People whose
work brings them into contact with asbestos may inhale fibers. Once inhaled, the small, inert asbestos fibers can easily penetrate the body‘s defenses. They are
deposited and retained in the airways and tissues of
the lungs and can cause cancer. Due to this negative
health impacts, the use of asbestos has been forbidden
for around 25 years. (Source: Utah Department of Environmental Quality)
Asbestos-containing materials can be classified into one of three types: sprayed or trowelled-on material
(e.g. ceilings or walls), thermal system insulation (e.g.
plaster cement wrap around boilers, on water and steam
pipe elbows, tees, fittings, and pipe runs), or miscellaneous materials (e.g. floor tile, sheet rock, ceiling tiles, automotive friction products). Millions of tons of asbestos
products will be transferred into waste material in the
future, especially in developing countries and not all
countries have national regulation on the handling and
final disposal of this significant waste stream.
Asbestos-containing products could be treated in
specially equipped rotary kilns at a temperature
> 800°C for a certain time. The asbestos minerals would
be transformed into other minerals like olivine or forsterite. Therefore co-processing could be, from a technical point of view, an option for treatment of asbestos
waste. However, sanitary landfilling must be regarded
as the most approproriate way of final disposal as the
material can be disposed undisturbed and does not
provoke the release of unwanted fibers into the air.
Once safely dumped, the asbestos waste does not have
further negative environmental impacts. As the availability and new installation of sanitary landfill become
more and more a problem, requests for co-processing
asbestos might arise in the future. However before cancelling asbestos from the banned list, detailed investigations are required in particular on occupational
health and safety in the whole supply chain. Further,
asbestos-specific regulations have to be introduced
and enforced by the national authorities.
A23
27.06.2006 10:19:12 Uhr
Annex 8: Justification for the Exclusion of certain
Waste Material from co-processing
7. Radioactive waste
Radioactive waste is normally excluded from “classical”
waste management, and therefore specific regulations
have to be applied according to international agreements. This means that radioactive waste can’t be
treated under the regulations of municipal and household waste and special permissions for its treatment
are required. The procedure is normally stipulated in
national nuclear laws. Cement plants are not suited to
handle radioactive waste.
However, there is a borderline case for those wastes
that have a low dose of radioactivity (e.g. waste from research, cleaning devices or in medical entities). Following
the recommendations from the International Atomic
Energy Agency and other organizations, many countries
define waste as low radioactive if the radiation of this
material to humans does not exceed 10 µSv per year. For
this case a restricted or even an unrestricted clearance
for handling this waste within an integrated waste management scheme could be given. At the international
level, there is still a big discrepancy on procedures for
clearance, and no uniform levels are given. As it is very
difficult for most companies and/or authorities to provide the evidence that the threshold limit valid of 10 µSv
could be assured at any time, it is recommended not to
use any kind of radioactive waste for co-processing.
A24
8. Unsorted municipal waste
Municipal waste is a heterogeneous material and consists in developing countries mainly of native organic
(e.g. kitchen refuse), inert (e.g. sand) and post-consumer (e.g. packing material) fraction. Valuable recycling
goods such as cardboard, plastic, glass or metal are often sorted out by the informal (waste pickers) or formal
(cooperatives) sector.
Despite recrent efforts by local authorities in keeping their cities cleaner, the problems persist with the
final disposal of the waste if no sanitary landfill sites
can be made available due to protests by citizens or the
high costs of the transport to a suitable site. In order to
escape from this bottleneck, local and national decision
makers opt for co-processing of the collected mixed
waste material and to shift the responsibility of final
treatment to the cement industry.
However, from an ecological, technical and financial point of view, the co-processing of unsorted municipal waste is not recommended. Mixed municipal waste
must be sorted in order to obtain defined waste streams
from a known quality. For selected materials, co-processing should be regarded as an integrated part of municipal solid waste management (Y see chapter 5.2.2).
27.06.2006 10:19:13 Uhr
Annex 9: Permit Model
Permit / Model
Sender: Licensing authority
Addressee: Company
I.
By these presents, pursuant to articles ….……Act……. you shall be granted the permit to build and operate a plant
for the production of cement with Co-processing Waste fuel with an output of ………t/d cement in…………(place)
……………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………(street, correct address)
II.
Plant Components
Y rotary kiln with fuel gas channels, stack
Y raw material storage
Y fuel storage (primary fuel, secondary fuel)
Y crushers, mills, coolers
Y conveying facilities
Y electrostatic filter
Y waste processing, supply station
Y …..
III.
Application Documents
1. Topographical map
2. Constructions documents:
_ key plan
_ drawings
_ building specification
3. Diagrammatic section of the plant
4. Machine site plan
5. Description of the plant and operation of the plant, the terms of normal working conditions
6. Description of the emission situation
_ the technology for prevention the pollution
_ contents of quantities of emissions
7. Description of secondary fuels: generation, processing, utilizing installation, supply, quality assurance system.
8. Environmental assessments
_ Air pollution emission prognosis (e.g. dust, NOx, SO2, heavy metals, PCDDs/PCDFs)
_ Noise emission prognosis
_ Odor emissions
9. Maintenance of industrial and occupational health and safety standards
10. Description of energy saving techniques and/or measures
11. Description for public information
A25
27.06.2006 10:19:13 Uhr
IV.
Plant Data
Output: ……………t/d cement
Primary Fuel : coal dust, heating oil,
Secondary fuel: solid fuels, liquid fuels, ……………
V.
Collateral Regulations
1.0 Air pollution control
1.1 All waste gases must be collected and must be discharged in a controlled manner via stack.
1.2 Emission measurements must satisfy the following requirements. They must be representative and comparable with one another permit uniform evaluation permit monitoring and verification of compliance with
emission limit by state –of-the art measurement practice
1.3 According to the EU directive 2000/76/EG, the emission in the exhaust air of waste gas purification plants
shall not exceed the following mass concentrations, always referred to standardized conditions (273 K;
1013 hPa) after deduction moisture. Reference oxygen content 10%
Pollutant (daily average value in mg/m3)
Total emission limit*
Particulate emissions (Total dust)
HCL
HF
NOx
SO2
TOC
Dust constituents and filter-slipping metals, metalloid
and compounds there of:
Cd + Tl
Hg
Sb + As + Pb + Cr + Co + Cu + Mn + Ni + V
30
10
1
500 - 800
50** – (350)
10**
PCDDs and PCDFs
0,1 ng I-TE/m3
0,05
0,05
0,5
* Emission limits are fixed on the basis “EU directive 2000/76/EG” but local authorities may establish special limits in case by case
** Exemption my be authorized by competent authority in cases where TOC and SO2 do not result from the incineration waste
1.4 Monitoring of emissions:
Y Substances contained in dust, HCL, PCDDs/PCDFs
For the monitoring of emissions, single measuring are to be conducted. The emission limit values are being
observed if single measuring results exceed the fixed emission limit value. Measurements have to be repeated at least every year an be performed independent experts.
Y Dust, NO SO
x 2
In order to monitor emissions, continuously measuring devices with automatic evaluation are to be installed. The result of the continuous measuring must be recorded. The measuring instruments have to be
tested with regard to their functioning once a year by independent experts
Y CO (limit value can set by competent authority)
A26
27.06.2006 10:19:14 Uhr
1.5 Qualified laboratories
To ensure a uniform measurement practice, representative measurement results and comparable quality procedures, qualified laboratories are to be commissioned with sampling and analysis activities and calibration
procedures. The location and configuration of the sampling point is to be coordinated with the competent
authorities (and the commissioned laboratory, where applicable)
2.0 Waste fuel control
2.1 Monitoring of Quality assurance for co-processing waste fuels
Y point of generation (producer):
– listing the waste according to type
– contractual agreement over permissible quality and composition of the waste
– documentation of quantities disposed of
Y processing installation (incoming):
– routine sampling and analysis*, retention samples
– documentation of the quantities received and processed
– routine sampling and analysis by independent expert
Y processing installation (outgoing):
– documentation of the outgoing quantities
Y utilizing installation (cement kiln, incoming):
– documentation of the incoming quantities
Y *parameters investigated:
– calorific value, moisture chlorine, sulfur, ash and ash components
– heavy metals (Cd, Tl, Hg, Sb, As, Pb, Cr, Co, Cu, Mn, Ni, V)
– PCBs, PAH, etc.
– maximum value, median value of the level of pollutants in the waste mix
A27
27.06.2006 10:19:14 Uhr
2.2 Pollutant limits in waste fuels for co-processing 18
median value (ppm)
maximum value (ppm)
Cadmium
Thallium
Mercury
Antimony
Arsenic
Cobalt
Nickel
Selenium
Tellurium
Lead
Chromium
Copper
Vanadium
Manganese
Tin
Beryllium
Chlorine
PAH
Sulfur
PCBs
2.3 Waste fuel catalogue for co-processing in cement kiln
Waste key / group
description of the co-processing fuel
3.0 Monitoring safe Combustion
Y The burning process has to be monitored continuously using modern process control technology,
Y The main parameters for analysis of the waste materials (calorific value, chemical composition, etc. ) must be
put into the process control system on a continuous basis,
Y Regulations of primary energy have to follow in reliance on secondary fuel data,
Y Waste fuels may only be supplied during normal continuous operation within the rated output range.
18 Must be defined from the local authorities
A28
27.06.2006 10:19:14 Uhr
3.1 Safety regulations
For supervising the parameters listed below, they should be linked to one another by a computer-controlled
logic system e.g.:
Y Gas temperature less than 900°C at kiln inlet
Y Temperature of material at kiln outlet less than 1250°C
Y CO- level above a value to be established by trial (Vol.%)
Y Inadmissible control deviations in the set point/actual value comparison
for the primary and secondary fuel feed
Y Raw meal feed of less than 75% of the max. possible quantity
Y Negative pressure before the exhaust gas fan below the value required at rated output
Y Permissible O level lower than inspection measurements require
2
Y Permissible NO level above 500 mg/m3
x
Y Failure of burner
Y Dust level above permissible limit
(This should ensure rapid detection of any disruption to normal operation and use appropriate response system
to prevent uncontrolled combustion of residues)
VI.
Noise
In so far as noise must be taken into consideration, the noise emission limit values shall be determined in
dependence of existing, surrounding development.
VII.
Sewage Water (if applicable)
VIII.
Reasons
(Reasons for a permission for co-processing waste
Y environmental assessment,
Y air pollution control,
Y waste management, waste hierarchy,
Y public involved
A29
27.06.2006 10:19:15 Uhr
Annex 10: Application Form
Address (authority)
1.0 Informations to the applicant
Name / company: ............................................................................................................................................................................
City / post code: ........................................... District: ................................................................................................................
Phone No.: ......................................................................................
Queries by: .....................................................................................
Department / person responsible/ phone No.: ...................................................................................................................
:
2.0 General information of plant
2.1 Location of plant
location of industry / area / municipal / town / street / street number:
2.2 Type of plant
marking of plant / scope of plant / capacity / output:
2.3 Is submitted
ò The permission for building and operating ...................................................................................................................
ò The permission for modification operating ...................................................................................................................
2.4 Application with the following technical documentations (e.g.)
ò Topographical map
ò Construction documents
ò Description of the plant and operation of the plant
ò Diagrammatic section of the plant (flow chart)
ò Machine site plan
ò Description of the emission situation
ò Environmental assessments
ò Application forms
ò Description for public information
ò Other technical documentations
ò Index
City, Date
A30
(signature of applicant)
27.06.2006 10:19:15 Uhr
3.0 Technical specifications for the main parts of the plant
Technical entity No: .............................
3.1 Inputs: Raw materials and suplies
Number in
comply with
flow chart
Description of
the material
Quantity of the
material [kg/h]
Composit
Component
3.2
Proportion [%]
Min.
Max.
Outputs : Products, waste-products, waste-water
Number in
comply with
flow chart
Description of
the material
Quantity of the
material [kg/h]
Composit
Component
Proportion [%]
Min.
Max.
A31
27.06.2006 10:19:15 Uhr
Annex 10: Application Form
4.0 Purification of waste gas
Combined with point source No.: : ........................................................................................................................................................
Typ of cleaning system: ................................................................................................................................................................................
Flue gas stream ............................. m3/h................................……. ºC ........................................m3/h*)
Efficiency of the Purification of waste gas in basic disign
purification materials
Conzentration mg/m3 *)
before - Cleaning - after
Collection efficiency
%
*) standard conditions
A32
27.06.2006 10:19:15 Uhr
A33
27.06.2006 10:19:16 Uhr
Frequency
and
duration
for the
emission
process
Date, time,
weekday
month
Rice
number
according
to flow
chart
Flow
m3/h*)
* standard conditions
** (e.g. working conditions, non-steady working conditions)
Operation
state **
interferences,
operation
states
with
emissions
Temperature°C
Waste gas
Name
In the follow shedule to descibe: all operating procederes with emissions:
Physical
condition
Min.
value
Min.
value
Max.
value
Mass-flow ** )
kg/h
Concentration
mg/m3 * )
Emission substance (seperated in specific components)
Technical entity No.: ...........................................Name of the Technical entity : ................................………………………………
5.0 Operating proceduere and und Emissions
Max.
value
Performance of
measurements
Annex 11: Permitting Process
Consultation by Authority
To file an Application
Checking Completeness
Complete
yes
no
To complete
Examination
Involvement other Public
Authorities and Experts
Open to the Public,
Publication
To bring forward ›Public Meeting‹
Final Examination
Definite Decision by Authority
A34
27.06.2006 10:19:16 Uhr
Annex 12: Information on Test Burns
Test Burns for Performance Verification
Test burns are required in some regulations and conventions for the verification of the destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) or the destruction efficiency (DE)
of certain principal organic hazardous compounds
(POHC) in a cement kiln. The DRE is calculated on the
basis of mass of the POHC content fed to the kiln, minus the mass of the remaining POHC content in the
stack emissions, divided by the mass of the POHC content within the feed. The DRE considers emissions to air
only. The DE considers all out-streams (liquid and solids)
in addition to the air emissions and is the most comprehensive way of verifying the performance.
Test burns with non-hazardous AFR are not a regulatory requirement but are sometimes done to evaluate
the behavior of the process and the influence on main
gaseous emissions and the cement clinker quality
when feeding AFR to the kiln. Such simplified tests are
usually conducted by process engineers at the cement
plant using already installed on-line monitoring equipment and process operational data. However, test burns
with hazardous compounds require professional supervision and independent verification.
Cement kilns co-processing hazardous wastes in
the EU are not required to carry out a test burn but must
comply with emission limit values for dusts, HCl, HF, NOx,
SO2, 12 heavy metals, total organic carbon (TOC) and dioxins and furans (PCDDs/PCDFs). The emission limit values for PCDDs/PCDFs are slightly more stringent in the
EU regulation than in the US. In the US, cement kilns coprocessing hazardous wastes must perform a test burn
to demonstrate the combustion performance on selected hazardous wastes to demonstrate the DRE for POHCs
in the waste stream. The test burn must fulfil three major requirements regarding combustion performance,
whereas the DRE is the most important: POHCs must be
destroyed and/or removed to an efficiency of 99.99% or
better; POPs wastes must achieve a DRE of 99.9999%.
The remaining two requirements deal with emissions of
particulates and gaseous hydrogen chloride. A destruction and removal efficiency of 100% will not be possible
to establish due to limitations in the analytical instruments. The Stockholm and the Basel Conventions require
a DE test for kilns aiming to treat POPs or POPs waste.
Taking into consideration the inherent features of
a cement kiln – the high temperatures, long residence
times, excess oxygen etc. – a test burn seems to be redundant. However, a test burn is actually the only way
to prove the destruction performance of a kiln and its
ability to destroy hazardous wastes in an irreversible
and sound way. However, the design and the conditions
of the test are crucial. Earlier data that indicated cement kiln DRE results below 99.99% are either from
outdated sources or improperly designed tests, or both.
In the early years of development of this technology and the sampling and analytical techniques to
evaluate its environmental performance, there were
several instances where POHCs were selected that did
not meet the necessary criterias. For example, a major
problem with many early tests was that the POHCs selected for DRE evaluation were organic species that are
typically found at trace levels in the stack emissions
from cement kilns that burn only fossil fuel. While
these products of incomplete combustion (PICs) were
emitted at very low levels, they nonetheless greatly interfered with the measurement of POHC destruction,
i.e. DRE could not be properly measured if POHCs used
in testing were chemically the same or closely related
to the type of PICs routinely emitted from raw materials. In some instances, operational factors during the
testing or sampling and analytical techniques contributed to low DRE results.
The US test burn permitting process, originally
designed to determine how effectively an incinerator is
able to operate under specifiable ”worst cases”, is however regarded as unnecessarily complex and costly, and
has discouraged cement plant owners from adopting
the test burn concept. An alternative approach will in
most cases provide the same qualitative information: a
„one-run“ test burn investigating the destruction performance when feeding a suitable hazardous waste
combined with a baseline study measuring the „blank“
emissions when no hazardous waste are introduced,
both tests done under normal process operating conditions. A cement plant is operated continuously, i.e. usually more than 330 days a year, and such a test scheme
will together with a feasibility study and an environ-
A35
27.06.2006 10:19:16 Uhr
Annex 12: Information on Test Burns
mental impact assessment provide sufficient information on the performance for the cement kiln in question. The following conditions should be fulfilled in the
one-run test burn:
destruction and removal efficiency for the hazardous compound should be at least 99.99%. Chlorinated aromatic compounds should be chosen as a test
compound if available because they are generally difficult to destroy. For POPs, a DRE of 99.9999% should
be achieved.
Y The cement kiln should meet an emissions limit for
PCDDs/PCDFs of 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm3 both under baseline
and test burn conditions.
Y The cement kiln should comply with existing national
emission limit values.
Such an approach for performance verification
will, together with adequate safety arrangements, input control and operational procedures secure the
same level of environmental protection as the current
EU and US regulation.
Y The
A36
Excerpts: from Kåre Helge Karstensen „Co-Processing of
Organic Hazardous Wastes in Cement Kilns in Developing Countries - Proposed Requirements“, article submitted for publication.
27.06.2006 10:19:17 Uhr
Annex 13: EPER – European Polluting Emissions
Register for the Cement Industry
Activity code:
3.1/3.3/3.4/3.5 - Installations for the production of cement klinker (>500t/d),
lime (>50t/d), glass (>20t/d), mineral substances (>20t/d) or ceramic products (>75t/d)
Area:
EU
Year:
2001
Pollutants:
31
Facilities:
665
Total emission values for activity grouped by pollutant:
Pollutant
To air (kg)
Direct to water (kg)
Indirect to water (kg)
Methane (CH4)
1,151,000.00
-
-
Carbon monoxide (CO)
277,250,000.00
-
-
Carbon dioxide (CO2)
142,011,000,000.00
-
-
Dinitrogenoxide (N2O)
136,500.00
-
-
Ammonia (NH3)
3,450,600.00
-
-
Non methane volatile organic
compounds (NMVOC)
6,228,000.00
-
-
Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
427,178,000.00
-
-
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
145,486,000.00
-
-
Nitrogen, total
-
216,000.00
-
Phosphorus, total
-
5,180.00
8,640.00
Arsenic and its compounds
5,038.20
4,156.10
17.50
Cadmium and its compounds
2,829.90
242.24
-
Chromium and its compounds
11,872.00
8,091.30
-
Copper and its compounds
5,895.00
2,870.00
-
Mercury and its compounds
2,889.90
76.30
-
Nickel and its compounds
14,287.00
7,438.50
-
Lead and its compounds
44,373.00
3,700.60
219.90
Zinc and its compounds
35,190.00
8,155.00
2,358.00
Dichloromethane (DCM)
158,490.00
-
-
Dioxines and furans (PCDDs and PCDFs)
0.0322
-
-
Trichloroethylene (TRI)
3,180.00
-
-
Benzene
126,070.00
-
-
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)
7,970.30
-
-
Phenols
-
246.00
1,775.00
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
-
282,000.00
358,700.00
Chlorides
-
781,000,000.00
-
Chlorine and inorganic compounds (as HCl)
1,956,000.00
-
-
Cyanides, total CN
-
204.00
-
Fluorides
-
11,750.00
-
Fluorine and inorganic compounds
(as hydrogen fluoride)
1,541,883.00
-
-
PM10 (Particulate matter less than 10 µm)
19,290,000.00
-
-
A37
27.06.2006 10:19:17 Uhr
Annex 14: Ranges of emissions and
Reduction Techniques
Cement Plants, Generation of Air Emissions and Respective Reduction Techniques
Point Source Dust
Reasons for emissions:
Ranges of emissions:
Outdated dedusting equipment may emit up to several 100 mg/Nm3. Electrostatic
precipitation easily reaches < 50 mg/Nm3. Bag filter dedusting produces values
< 20 mg/Nm3. The visibility limit for point source dust is generally assumed to be
around 80 mg/Nm3.
Reduction techniques:
Bag filters and electrostatic precipitators for all kiln types and input materials.
Fugitive Dust
Reasons for generation:
Material spills from inadequately dedusted and/or worn out material transfer
points/material feeding points, material storage areas, dusty transport roads etc.
with subsequent wind erosion/dispersion.
Hard to quantify, mainly short range in-plant impacts (coarse dust).
Preventive and quick reactive maintenance, wetting of stockpiles, roof covering
of stockpiles, vacuum cleaning systems, etc.
SO2
A38
The cement production process includes thermal treatment (drying, heating, calcining,
clinkerization, cooling) of materials through direct contact with hot gases. It also includes pneumatic material transports and material classification/separation. At the
end of these processes air/gas and pulverized materials have to be separated again.
Incomplete separation gives rise to dust emissions (kiln/raw mill main stack, clinker
cooler stack, cement mill stacks, material transfer point dedusting air outlets).
Volatile sulfur in raw materials roasted off at material preheating.
Wet kilns only: 10% to 50% of total sulfur inputs are emitted
Dependent on content of raw materials of volatile sulfur compounds.
Mostly below 300 mg/Nm3. Sometimes up to 3000 mg/Nm3.
Hydrated lime addition to kiln feed for small gaps (<700 mg/Nm3).
Wet sulfur scrubbers for large gaps.
27.06.2006 10:19:18 Uhr
NOx
(unabated)
Thermal NO is produced in the main flame of all cement kilns in varying quantities
dependant on sintering zone and flame temperatures. Some fuel NOx might be
added via precalciner fuels.
300 to 2000 mg/Nm3
With limited effect:
cooling of main flame
Y Low-NO burner
x
Y Reducing zones (mid kiln, transition chamber, low-NO calciner)
x
Y Water
With good effect:
non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) with
Y ammonia or urea injection in appropriate
Y temperature window.
Y <800 mg/Nm3 achievable with existing SP/PC kilns.
Y <500 mg/Nm3 achievable with new SP/PC kilns.
Y Selective
VOC
Volatile organics in raw materials roasted off at material preheating (idem SO2). No
products of incomplete combustion from main or precalciner firing.
Dependant on content of raw materials of volatile organics. Mostly below 50 mg/Nm3.
Sometimes up to 500 (+) mg/Nm3.
No cost effective end-of pipe techniques available to date, therefore avoid use of critical input materials or feed them together with the fuels.
HCl
Chlorine may be present in raw materials as well as in alternative fuels (spent solvents, plastic). If inputs exceed the (low) carrying capacity of the clinker/kiln system
then emission might result.
SP/PC kiln systems: <10 mg/Nm3. Wet kilns: Up to 80 mg/Nm3
No direct HCl abatement technique available, but sulfur wet scrubbers
also reduce HCl emissions.
A39
27.06.2006 10:19:18 Uhr
Annex 14: Ranges of Emissions and
Reduction Techniques
NH3
<1 to 15 mg/Nm3 as a rule with exceptions up to 40 mg/Nm3.
Keep enrichment in outer circulation low by extracting dust from a suitable point in
the process and feeding to the transition chamber.
Benzene (C6H6)
Benzene might be present in conventional and alternative raw materials and is partially roasted off at material preheating.
Normally 1 to 2 mg/Nm3, up to 3 and more mg/Nm3 in rare cases
No reasonable abatement technique, input limitation with raw materials is the option.
Dioxins and Furans
Dioxins, furans or advanced precursors might be present in conventional (rarely) and
alternative raw materials and are partially roasted off at material preheating.
Reactive forms at chlorine (Cl2) present in the exhaust gases might expedite PCDDs/
PCDFs formation or modification.
From below detection limits up to around 20% of the often adopted emission limit
value of 0.1 ng/Nm3. Sometimes values up to 2 or 3 ng/Nm3 can be found.
Same as benzene.
Heavy Metals
A40
Some natural raw materials (particularly clays) may contain NH3 which is partially
roasted-off at material preheating. Other NH3 might be NH3 slip (loss) from a SNCR
NOx reduction installation.
Heavy metals are ubiquitous in all cement kiln input materials. Since clean gas dust
(i.e. dust after the dedusting equipment) is an input materials fraction, it also contains
heavy metals. In addition, semi-volatile and volatile heavy metals are evaporated and
condense (predominantly) on the fine dust fraction.
Most heavy metal emissions (typically 80%) remain below the detection limits. All
(with one exception) remain safely below generally adopted limit values. The one exception is mercury, which can exceed limit values in case of excessive inputs with materials. Emission range of mercury: from below detection limit up to < 0.05 mg/Nm3
Efficient dedusting equipment and limitation of mercury inputs in feed materials.
27.06.2006 10:19:18 Uhr
Annex 15: Total Emission limit Values for
Cement Kilns co-processing Waste
Directive 2000/76/EC incineration of waste
Pollutant
C
Total dust
30
HCI
10
HF
1
NOx
5001/8002
Cd + TI
0.05
Hg
0.05
0.5
Dioxins and Furans
0.1
SO2
503
TOC
103
Daily average 10% O2, dry all values in mg/m3 dioxins
and furnans in ng/m3
1) new plants
2) existing plants
3) exceptions may be authorized by the competent authority in cases where SO2 and TOC do not result
from the incineration of waste
Source: Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 4. December 2000 on the incineration of waste. Annex II: Determination of air
emission limit values for the incineration of waste –
Special provisions for cement kilns.
The directive can be downloaded under:
Y http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/wasteinc/
newdir/2000-76_en.pdf
A41
27.06.2006 10:19:19 Uhr
Annex 16: Summary of the WBCSD/UNEP
report on POPs
Summary of the WBCSD/UNEP report on POPs
Formation and Release of POPs in the Cement Industry / Second edition
30 January 2006
Written by Kåre Helge Karstensen
Executive summary
The Stockholm Convention requires Parties to take measures to reduce or eliminate releases of persistent organic
pollutants (POPs) from intentional production and use, from unintentional production and from stockpiles and
wastes. The chemicals intentionally produced and currently assigned for elimination under the Stockholm Convention are the pesticides aldrin, chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene (HCB), mirex and toxaphene, as well as the industrial chemical Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs).
The Convention also seeks the continuing minimisation and, where feasible, elimination of the releases of
unintentionally produced POPs such as the by-products from wet chemical and thermal processes, polychlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxins/-furans (PCDDs/PCDFs) as well as HCB and PCBs. Concepts of Best Available Technology
and Best Environmental Practices to achieve such minimisation and reduction from all potential source categories
will be further developed by the Conference of the Parties. Cement kilns co-processing hazardous waste are explicitly mentioned in the Stockholm Convention as an “industrial source having the potential for comparatively high
formation and release of these chemicals to the environment”.
The cement industry takes any potential emission of POPs seriously, both because perceptions about these
emissions have an impact on the industry‘s reputation, and because even small quantities of dioxin-like compounds
can accumulate in the biosphere, with potentially long-term consequences.
The main objective of this study was to compile data on the status of POPs emissions from cement kilns coprocessing hazardous wastes, to share state of the art knowledge about PCDDs/PCDFs formation mechanisms in
cement production processes and to show how it’s possible to control and minimise PCDDs/PCDFs emissions
from cement kilns utilising integrated process optimisation, so called primary measures. This report provides the
most comprehensive data set available on POPs emission from the cement industry collected from public literature,
scientific databases and individual company measurements. This report evaluates around 2200 PCDDs/PCDFs measurements, many PCB measurements and a few HCB measurements made from the 1970s until recently. The data
represents emission levels from large capacity processing technologies, including wet and dry process cement kilns,
performed under normal and worst case operating conditions, with and without the co-processing of a wide range of
alternative fuel and raw materials and with wastes and hazardous wastes fed to the main burner, to the rotary kiln inlet
and to the preheater/precalciner. Vertical shaft kilns, regarded to be an obsolete technology but still common in many
countries, have not been dealt with in this report due to lack of emission data. The PCDDs/PCDFs data presented in
this report shows that:
Most cement kilns can meet an emission level of 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm3 if primary measures are applied
Co-processing of alternative fuels and raw materials, fed to the main burner, kiln inlet or the precalciner does not
seem to influence or change the emissions of POPs
A42
27.06.2006 10:19:19 Uhr
Data from dry preheater and precalciner cement kilns in developing countries presented in this report show very
low emission levels, much lower than 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm3.
The emissions from modern dry preheater/precalciner kilns seem generally to be slightly lower than emissions
from wet kilns. A common practice in many countries today is to co-process energy containing wastes and alternative
raw materials in dry preheater/precalciner kilns, thereby saving fossil fuel and virgin raw materials. One example
illustrates this: a UNEP project measured emissions between 0.0001-0.018 ng TEQ/m3 from a dry preheater kiln
in Thailand replacing parts of the fossil fuel with tyres and hazardous waste; the lowest concentration was found
when the kiln was co-processing hazardous waste, 0.0002 ng TEQ/m3.
Emission data from US cement kilns in the 1980s and first part of the 1990s stands in contrast with newer
findings. They often indicated that cement kilns co-processing hazardous waste as a co-fuel had much higher
PCDDs/PCDFs emissions than kilns co-processing non-hazardous wastes or using conventional fuel only. In recent
documents however, the US EPA has explained the most probable cause for these findings, namely that cement kilns
burning hazardous waste were normally tested under “worst” scenario trial burn conditions, i.e. typically high waste
feeding rates and high temperatures in the air pollution control device, conditions today known to stimulate
PCDDs/PCDFs formation.
Cement kilns burning non-hazardous waste or conventional fossil fuel only were however tested under normal
conditions, no “worst” scenario conditions, making a comparison between hazardous waste burning and non-hazardous waste burning kilns dubious. Reducing the temperature at the inlet of the air pollution control device is one
factor which has shown to limit dioxin formation and emissions at all types of cement kilns, independent of waste
feeding, as lower temperatures are believed to prevent the post-combustion catalytic formation of PCDDs/PCDFs.
The US EPA concluded in 1999 in the new Maximum Achievable Control Technology regulation that hazardous waste
burning in cement kilns does not have an impact on PCDDs/PCDFs formation because they are formed post-combustion, i.e. in the air pollution control device.
This report also provides a large number of measurements of PCDDs/PCDFs in products and residues from
the cement industry. The levels are normally low and in the same magnitude as found in foods like fish, butter and
breast milk as well as soil, sediments and sewage sludge. For new cement plants and major upgrades the Best Available Technology for the production of cement clinker is a dry process kiln with multi-stage preheating and precalcination. A smooth and stable kiln process, operating close to the process parameter set points is beneficial for all
kiln emissions as well as for the energy use.
A43
27.06.2006 10:19:21 Uhr
Annex 16: Summary of the WBCSD/UNEP
Report on POPs
The most important primary measures to achieve compliance with an emission level of 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm3 is
quick cooling of the kiln exhaust gases to lower than 200°C in long wet and long dry kilns without preheating.
Modern preheater and precalciner kilns have this feature already inherent in the process design. Feeding of alternative raw materials as part of raw-material-mix should be avoided if it includes organic material and no alternative
fuels should be fed during start-up and shut down.
The UNEP Standardized Toolkit for Identification and Quantification of Dioxin and Furan Releases assign
emission factors to all source categories and processes that are listed in Annex C, Parts II and III of the Stockholm
Convention. The emission factors for cement kilns co-processing hazardous wastes are among the lowest of all
source categories.
Since PCDDs/PCDFs is the only group of POPs commonly being regulated up to now, there are fewer measurements available for HCB and PCBs. However, the more than 50 PCB measurements referred to in this report show
that all values are below 0.4 µg PCB TEQ/m3, many at a few nanogram level or below the detection limit. 10 HCB
measurements show a concentration of a few nanograms per cubic meter or concentrations below the detection
limit.
The whole report can be downloaded from:
Y www.wbcsdcement.org
A44
27.06.2006 10:19:21 Uhr
Annex 17: Template for Master Data File
for commonly used Waste
A45
27.06.2006 10:19:21 Uhr
Annex 17: Template for Master Data File
for commonly used Waste
A46
27.06.2006 10:19:23 Uhr
A47
27.06.2006 10:19:26 Uhr
Annex 17: Template for master data file
for commonly used waste
A48
27.06.2006 10:19:28 Uhr
Annex 18: AFR Quality Control Scheme
Waste Master Datafile
Accepted
Waste Source
Individual Waste
Shipments
Kiln Co-processing
Fingerprint Analysis
Pass
Pass
Fail
Waste Source
Unacceptable
Pass
Dettailed Analysis
AFFR Blending /
Treatment
Fail
Pass
Fail
Periodic Quality
Control Sample
Fail
Fail
Source Qualification Analysis
Waste Shipment Rejected
AFR Spectification Analysis
Candidate Waste Sources
Notification to Authonties
External Verification
Waste Source Qualification
Waste Delivery Controle
AFR Control
A49
27.06.2006 10:19:30 Uhr
Annex 19: Situation Analysis – how to do it
The following research tools are examples of how to do
a situation analysis. The best will be to choose research
tools that suit both your and your stakeholders‘ needs.
Step I: Identify users and uses
of the needs assessment
Y Identify
Y Door
knocking – probably the least formal and most
effective way to engender community spirit about
your company in the neighborhood.
– one-on-one interviews provide you with
concentrated information about a particular topic
and the opportunity to probe further on specific
points as needed.
the persons who will act on
the assessment
Y Identify the use of the assessment e.g.
provide a basis for the strategic plan
Y Interviews
Y
Questionnaires – these include in person, telephone
or mail surveys. Random selection of respondents is
key to obtaining objective survey results.
assessment – conducting a needs assessment
with a small ‚focus‘ group of stakeholders is a formal
method to gain valuable information about stakeholder needs and expectations. Focus groups can either be internal or external. The following four steps
are recommended in conducting a needs assessment:
Step II: Describe the context
Y What
is the physical and social environment of
your activities?
Y When have you started, or are you just starting?
Y Is this an initial assessment or are you trying to
verify the appropriateness of your activities?
Y Needs
Y Media
monitoring - this technique is used to gauge
the company reputation. This includes analyzing positive, negative or neutral stories in the media, number
of mentions, length of stories, content and focus, etc.
You can then interview selected journalists to gain
more in-depth information.
Step III: Identify needs
Y Describe
circumstances / problems of
the stakeholders
Y Suggest possible solutions to their needs and
analyse likely effectiveness, feasibility and sustainability
Step IV: Meet needs and communicate results
Y Recommend
actions based on the needs, problems, and solutions identified
Y Communicate the results of the assessment to
your stakeholders
A50
27.06.2006 10:19:31 Uhr
General and chemical abbreviations
General abbreviations
AFR
Alternative fuels and raw materials
ASR
Automotive shredder residues
BAT
Best Available Technology
BEP
Best Environmental Practice
BpD
Bypass dust (can in some cases be produced by SP/PC kilns)
BSE
Mad cow disease (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy)
CKD
Cement kiln dust (can in some cases be produced by long dry and wet (chain) kilns)
CP
Cleaner Production
CSI
Cement Sustainability Initiative
DRE
Destruction and Removal Efficiency
EC
European Community
EMR
Emission Monitoring and Reporting
ELV
Emission Limit Value
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
ESP
Electrostatic Precipitator
HHV
High Heating Value
IGO
International governmental organizations
LCA
Life Cycle Analysis
MBI
Market-based instruments
NGO
Non-Governmental Organization
OEL
Occupational exposure limits
OH&S
Operational Health and Safety
POPs
Persistent organic pollutants
RDF
Refuse derived fuels
SNCR
Selective non-catalytic reduction
SP/PC
SP = Suspension (or cyclone) preheater kiln
PC = Precalciner kiln (also includes a cyclone preheater)
TOC
Total organic carbon
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
VDI
German Association of Engineers
WBCSD
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
µS
µ-Sievert
A51
27.06.2006 10:19:31 Uhr
General and chemical abbreviations
Chemical abbreviations
A52
Al2O3
Aluminum oxide
NOx
Nitrogen oxides
As
Arsenic
Ni
Nickel
BTX (C6H6)
Benzene
O2
Oxygen
BTX
Benzene, toluene, xylene
PAH
Polyaromatic hydrocarbons
CaCO3
Calcium carbonate
Pb
Lead
Cd
Cadmium
PCBs
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Co
Cobalt
PCDDs
Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins
CO
Carbon monoxide
PCDFs
Polychlorinated dibenzofurans
CO2
Carbon dioxide
Sb
Antimony
Cr
Chromium
SO2
Sulfur dioxide
Cu
Copper
SOx
Sulfur oxides
Fe2O3
Iron oxide
SiO2
Silicon dioxide
HCB
Hexachlorobenzene
TCE
Trichlorethylene
HCl
Hydrogen chloride
TCM
Tetrachloromethane
HF
Hydrogen fluoride
Tl
Tallium
Hg
Mercury
V
Vanadium
CH4
Methane
VOC
Volatile organic compound
Mn
Manganese
Zn
Zinc
NH3
Ammonia
27.06.2006 10:19:32 Uhr
Glossary
Alternative fuels and raw materials (AFR)
Inputs to clinker production derived from waste streams
that contribute energy and raw material.
Clinker
An intermediate product in cement manufacturing
produced by decarbonizing, sintering and fast-cooling
ground limestone.
Concrete
A material produced by mixing cement, water and aggregates. The cement acts as a binder, and the average
cement content in concrete is about 15%.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR)
The commitment of business to contribute to sustainable development, working with employees, their families, the local community and society at large to improve their quality of life.
Dust
Total clean gas dust after de-dusting equipment. (In the
case of cement kiln main stacks, more than 95% of the
clean gas dust has PM10 quality, i.e. is particulate matter (PM) smaller than 10 microns.)
Eco-efficiency
Reduction in the resource intensity of production, i.e.
the input of materials, natural resources and energy
compared with the output: essentially, doing more
with less.
Electronic waste
This is waste from electrical and electronic equipment
including all components, subassemblies and consumables which are part of the product at the time of discarding (def. according to EU-Directive 2002/96/EC
from January 2003).
End-of-life application
Concrete debris which is not reused but disposed of in
a landfill (“end of life”).
Fossil fuels
Non-renewable carbon-based fuels traditionally used
by the cement industry, including coal and oil.
Industrial ecology
Framework for improvement in the efficiency of industrial systems by imitating aspects of natural ecosystems, including the transformation of wastes to input
materials; one industry’s waste becomes another industry’s input.
Kiln
Large industrial oven for producing clinker used in the
manufacture of cement. In this report, “kiln” always refers to a rotary kiln.
Leaching
The extraction, by a leachant (de-mineralized water or
others) of inorganic and/or organic components of a
solid material, into a leachate by one or more physicalchemical transport mechanisms.
Lost time injury
A work-related injury after which the injured person cannot work for at least one full shift or full working day.
Occupational health and safety (OH&S)
Policies and activities to promote and secure the health
and safety of all employees, subcontractors, third parties and visitors.
Quality
Quality is defined as the degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfils requirements (def. according
to ISO 9000).
Stakeholder
A group or an individual who can affect or is affected by
an organization or its activities.
Stakeholder dialogue
The engagement of stakeholders in a formal and/or
informal process of consultation to explore specific
stakeholder needs and perceptions.
Waste
Any substance or object that the holder discards or intends or is required to discard or has to be treated in
order to protect the public health or the environment.
A53
27.06.2006 10:19:32 Uhr
Notes
A54
27.06.2006 10:19:33 Uhr
A55
27.06.2006 10:19:33 Uhr
Notes
A56
27.06.2006 10:19:33 Uhr
GTZ and Holcim would like to express their sincere
gratitude to all experts who contributed to the
Guidelines, either as authors, as reviewers or by
providing other valuable inputs. Our thanks also go to
BMZ for financing the public part of the project.
Design:
© 2006, creative republic.
Thomas Maxeiner Kommunikationsdesign
Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Photos:
© 2006, Deutsche Gesellschaft
für Technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GTZ) ,
Eschborn, Germany
© 2006, Holcim Group Support Ltd
Zürich, Switzerland
© 2006, University of Applied Sciences,
Northwestern Switzerland,
Muttenz, Switzerland
Print&Production:
ROHLAND & more Mediengesellschaft mbH
Offenbach, Germany
GmbH (GTZ)
P.O. Box 5180
65726 Eschborn
Germany
Tel. ++49 6196 79 0
Fax ++49 6196 79 11 15
[email protected]
www.gtz.de
The public part is being financed by:
Hagenholzstr. 85
8050 Zürich
Switzerland
Tel. ++41 58 858 82 30
Fax ++41 58 858 82 34
[email protected]
www.holcim.com
Fachhochschule
D. Mutz
Gründenstrasse 40
4132 Muttenz
Switzerland
Tel. ++41 61 467 42 42
Fax ++41 467 44 60
[email protected]
www.fhnw.ch
Guidelines on co-processing Waste Materials in Cement Production | The GTZ-Holcim Public Private Partnership
Guidelines on co-processing

Guidelines on co-processing Waste Materials in Cement Production

Transcription

Similar documents

Flexilite MC Cement Datasheet

POL895 C-57D Instrucitons

FLEXTILE LTD - Hudson Restoration

Co-Processing_Technology_Geocycle_291013 [Compatibility Mode]

Stephens Road (NB Kelly Rd to I-94)

Cement Sector

Creating Hypertufa Containers

POL821 Batmobile InstrSht Front

JNCGU Environmental Statement - Jaiprakash Power Ventures